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.
Tesla shared a striking video showcasing the decommissioning of the original Model S and Model X assembly line at its Fremont Factory in Northern California. Completed in just 46 days, the teardown involved heavy machinery dismantling concrete pits, removing robotic arms and conveyors, and clearing the space for new production.
The post, captioned “End of an era,” captured both the end of a historic chapter and Tesla’s aggressive pivot toward its next major initiative, Optimus.
End of an era: Decommissioning the original Model S & X assembly line in just 46 days pic.twitter.com/kGEdfhl62h
— Tesla Manufacturing (@gigafactories) July 10, 2026
The decision to retire the Model S and Model X originated during Tesla’s Q4 2025 Earnings Call in late January 2026. CEO Elon Musk announced that production of the company’s flagship sedan and SUV would wind down by the end of Q2 2026, describing it as bringing the programs to an “honorable discharge.”
Custom orders ceased around early April 2026, with the final vehicles rolling off the line in early May. A special signature delivery ceremony on May 20 marked the emotional close for these vehicles, which had defined Tesla’s early success and luxury EV segment since the Model S launch in 2012.
The primary reason for tearing down the lines was to repurpose the valuable factory floor space for high-volume production of Tesla’s Optimus humanoid robot. Musk had indicated on Earnings Calls that the Fremont S/X line would be replaced by a dedicated Optimus manufacturing line targeting a capacity of one million units per year.
This move aligns with Tesla’s broader strategic shift from traditional vehicle manufacturing toward robotics and artificial intelligence, leveraging the company’s expertise in autonomy, AI training, and high-volume production.
Optimus, Tesla’s general-purpose humanoid robot, is designed to perform repetitive or dangerous tasks in factories, warehouses, and eventually homes. Powered by Tesla’s AI and Neural Networks, it aims to be a versatile, affordable platform. Production of Optimus Gen 3 is already underway in limited form at Fremont, with full-scale output on the converted line expected to begin in late July or August.
Tesla is targeting rapid scaling, with internal ambitions pointing toward tens or even hundreds of thousands of units annually by the end of 2026.
Longer-term, Tesla is constructing a much larger second-generation Optimus facility at Giga Texas, with potential capacity reaching millions of units per year. The company views Optimus as a transformative product that could eventually surpass its automotive business in scale and value, enabling widespread deployment of useful robots across industries. CEO Elon Musk has even predicted it would be the most popular product of all-time.
As one era closes at Fremont, another is rapidly taking shape.
Elon Musk posted a candid admission on his social media platform X on June 9, declaring that he had been “clearly wrong” about Anthropic. The statement marked a notable reversal from his earlier skepticism toward the AI company.
In September, Musk had written, “Winning was never in the set of possible outcomes for Anthropic,” reflecting his view at the time that the startup had lacked the foundation or even the trajectory to succeed in what is an incredibly intense race for advanced artificial intelligence.
Musk’s latest post came amid discussion of Anthropic’s reliance on external compute resources. He praised the company’s progress, stating that Anthropic is “obviously currently the leader in AI” and that “no company has released a model as good as Mythos/Fable,” with expectations of a strong follow-up in Mythos 2.
The tone shifted dramatically from dismissal to acknowledgement of superior performance.
I was clearly wrong about Anthropic. They are obviously currently the leader in AI. No company has released a model as good as Mythos/Fable and they will undoubtedly have Mythos 2 ready soon.
And I would never cut them off in a way that hurt them badly, even as a competitor.…
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 9, 2026
The context of Musk’s comments added significance. Anthropic has been operating under a recent compute deal with SpaceXAI, Musk’s AI infrastructure-focused venture. The pair entered a short-term GPU lease agreement initiated in May, providing Anthropic access to critical computing power for training and deploying its frontier models.
SpaceXAI signs agreement with Anthropic for massive AI supercomputer access
Some observers had speculated that Musk could leverage this dependency to disadvantage a rival. Musk directly addressed the possibility, writing, “I would never cut them off in a way that hurt them badly, even as a competitor. That’s not my style.”
To support his commitment to ethical competition, Musk referenced concrete examples from his other companies. Tesla famously open-sourced its entire portfolio of electric vehicle patents in 2014. The move was designed to accelerate the global adoption of sustainable transportation technology rather than protect proprietary advantages.
Tesla also made its Supercharger network available to competing electric vehicle manufacturers, transforming what could have remained an exclusive charging ecosystem into a shared infrastructure that benefits the broader industry and reduces barriers for EV adoption.
Musk further pointed to SpaceX’s practices, noting that the company launches satellites for competing commercial systems “with no increase in price or use of unfair terms.” He extended the principle to his social platform, observing that “even my worst enemies attack me on this platform,” underscoring preference for open discourse over retaliation.
These examples have illustrated Musk’s long-standing philosophy that long-term technological progress is best served by open competition and infrastructure sharing rather than leveraging market power to stifle rivals. In the fast-evolving AI sector, where compute resources and model capabilities determine leadership, Musk’s stance suggests a willingness to compete on innovation and performance alone.
Musk’s admission arrives as SpaceXAI itself advances its own frontier models while maintaining business relationships across the ecosystem. By publicly correcting his earlier assessment and reaffirming principles of fair play, Musk highlights a model of competition that prioritizes advancement of the field over short-term tactical advantages.
A Tesla analyst believes the company’s Full Self-Driving suite is close to an “inflection point,” where people will finally realize that it is more than what it appears, similar to how many view the iPhone.
Pierre Ferragu, an analyst who has covered Tesla for many years at New Street Research, says the Full Self-Driving suite is one piece of evidence supporting the view that a Tesla is more than a car. He compared it to the iPhone and noted that the high price tag seemed like a lot for a phone early on. Then people realized the iPhone was more than just something you make calls with. It made their lives simpler.
🚨 Analyst @p_ferragu says Tesla Full Self-Driving is at an “inflection point” in a recent commentary:
“A Tesla is not a car, the same way an iPhone was not a phone. As a tool that gets you to work peacefully every morning, it is not expensive. Give us 2 more quarters to see… pic.twitter.com/tm6xFrjVPV
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 10, 2026
Suddenly, that price tag was justified.
Tesla offers several models under the average transaction price for a new vehicle, which was above $49,000, according to Kelley Blue Book. However, that does not take into account that many people can still not afford a $35,000 vehicle. Ferragu offers his thoughts:
“Remember when the addressable market of the iPhone was 10 million units? Then people realized how good it was, and now, nearly 250m are sold every year.
A similar evolution for Tesla is still on the table. A Tesla is not a car, the same way an iPhone was not a phone.
A model 3 at $35k + $100 per month is too expensive for most, but only as a car, the same way a $600 iPhone was too expensive for most, until most realized it was much more than a phone.
As a tool that gets you to work peacefully every morning, it is not expensive.”
This point is valid, especially considering the iPhone’s impact on the cell phone market. There are still a handful of players, but most people you know have an iPhone. The iPhone ties into Apple’s other ecosystem of products.
This is how Tesla plans to infiltrate the automotive market, and once the company offers a fully autonomous suite, or something that can allow for unsupervised self-driving, more and more people will flock to Tesla.
Ferragu believes Tesla needs two additional quarters of development before things will truly change. He didn’t elaborate on what will happen in two quarters, but he said it will give us all time to “see where this is heading.”
It is really quite interesting to see people’s reactions when they find out what a Tesla is capable of. Full Self-Driving is a great tool for taking stress out of travel; I use it daily, and it has made it really difficult to consider taking any other car on a drive of practically any length.
To me, it is really hard to believe that people will not at least seriously consider a Tesla as their next car if they experience Full Self-Driving. This is a major point for those who argue that Tesla should advertise in some way.
Tesla shows rapid teardown of Model S and X lines, paving the way for Optimus at Fremont
Elon Musk admits he was ‘clearly wrong’ about Anthropic
