Connect with us

News

SpaceX rings in Falcon 9’s 10th anniversary with a rocket reusability first

Five launches, one booster. (SpaceX, SpaceX, SpaceX, Richard Angle, Richard Angle)

Published

on

Today is the tenth anniversary of SpaceX’s inaugural Falcon 9 launch, marking a decade of largely uninterrupted success that the company has rung in with a record-breaking Starlink launch and rocket landing.

Just one day shy of the occasion, booster B1049 lifted off on its fifth orbital launch and Falcon 9’s 86th launch overall, successfully placing the eighth batch of 60 SpaceX Starlink satellites in orbit and becoming the first booster ever to complete five orbital-class launches and landings. Designed to fly no fewer than 10 times each, that means that SpaceX is already half of the way to achieving a major goal of the rocket’s Block 5 upgrade just 24 months after its launch debut.

With Starlink-8 under its belt, Falcon 9 B1049 has officially become the fastest orbital-class rocket or spacecraft in history to perform five launches, beating out Space Shuttles Columbia (~27 months), Challenger (~24 months), Discovery (~22 months), Atlantis (~26 months), and Endeavour (~29 months) with launches in ~20 months. Over the 10 years it’s been operational, thanks in large part to the unprecedented leaps SpaceX has made while independently developing booster reusability, Falcon 9 has become the most affordable source of large orbital launches and has come to dominate the commercial launch market and the company’s lead is only likely to grow in the coming years.

Lifting off just hours after SpaceX completed Port Canaveral recovery operations with the first astronaut-proven Falcon 9 booster (B1058), B1049’s fifth successful launch and landing means that the company will soon be able to attempt the sixth launch of an orbital-class booster for the first time ever. All but guaranteed to support one of the 20-24 Starlink missions SpaceX has planned for 2020, B1049 could be ready for its sixth launch as early as late July or August.

(Richard Angle)
(Richard Angle)
(Richard Angle)
(Richard Angle)

Just like the booster’s two prior launches, B1049 was carrying a ~16 metric ton (~35,000 lb) batch of 60 Starlink communications satellites. Thanks to Falcon 9’s exceptional cost-to-performance ratio and the rapid expansion of Starlink launch activities, SpaceX’s workhorse rocket has already launched almost 450 metric tons (~1 million lb) of satellites and cargo into orbit over 10 years of service and 85 launches.

If things go according to plan, the Starlink launch campaign SpaceX needs to complete the massive satellite constellation will rapidly double (and almost triple) the total mass SpaceX has placed in orbit. The first major phase of 4400 satellites – currently 9.5% complete – will collectively weigh more than 1100 metric tons (~2.5 million lb), while the combined second and third phases will raise that by almost a full magnitude. Falcon 9 may forever be famous thanks to the leaps it’s made in reusability, affordability, and reliability, but it will likely end up being best known for its foundational role in the deployment of SpaceX’s vast Starlink internet constellation within a few years.

Advertisement
-->
(Richard Angle)
(Richard Angle)

After B1049.5 safely returns to Port Canaveral aboard drone ship Just Read The Instructions (JRTI) sometime next week, SpaceX can offload the rocket, transport it to a nearby hangar, and begin preparing it for launch #6 – a first for the company. If SpaceX can average 90-day turnarounds for the booster over its next several flights, B1049 could potentially become the first Falcon 9 first stage to achieve its 10-flight design goal before the end of next year.

Meanwhile, SpaceX is already preparing to launch its next (ninth) Starlink mission as early as June 12th, beating the pad’s current turnaround record by almost three days (~25%). All things considered, a full decade in, SpaceX and its Falcon 9 rocket are just getting started.

Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.

Eric Ralph is Teslarati's senior spaceflight reporter and has been covering the industry in some capacity for almost half a decade, largely spurred in 2016 by a trip to Mexico to watch Elon Musk reveal SpaceX's plans for Mars in person. Aside from spreading interest and excitement about spaceflight far and wide, his primary goal is to cover humanity's ongoing efforts to expand beyond Earth to the Moon, Mars, and elsewhere.

Advertisement
Comments

News

Tesla tinkering with Speed Profiles on FSD v14.2.1 has gone too far

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla recently released Full Self-Driving (FSD) v14.2.1, its latest version, but the tinkering with Speed Profiles has perhaps gone too far.

We try to keep it as real as possible with Full Self-Driving operation, and we are well aware that with the new versions, some things get better, but others get worse. It is all part of the process with FSD, and refinements are usually available within a week or so.

However, the latest v14.2.1 update has brought out some major complaints with Speed Profiles, at least on my end. It seems the adjustments have gone a tad too far, and there is a sizeable gap between Profiles that are next to one another.

The gap is so large that changing between them presents a bit of an unwelcome and drastic reduction in speed, which is perhaps a tad too fast for my liking. Additionally, Speed Profiles seem to have a set Speed Limit offset, which makes it less functional in live traffic situations.

Before I go any further, I’d like to remind everyone reading this that what I am about to write is purely my opinion; it is not right or wrong, or how everyone might feel. I am well aware that driving behaviors are widely subjective; what is acceptable to one might be unacceptable to another.

Speed Profiles are ‘Set’ to a Speed

From what I’ve experienced on v14.2.1, Tesla has chosen to go with somewhat of a preset max speed for each Speed Profile. With ‘Hurry,’ it appears to be 10 MPH over the speed limit, and it will not go even a single MPH faster than that. In a 55 MPH zone, it will only travel 65 MPH. Meanwhile, ‘Standard’ seems to be fixed at between 4-5 MPH over.

This is sort of a tough thing to have fixed, in my opinion. The speed at which the car travels should not be fixed; it should be more dependent on how traffic around it is traveling.

It almost seems as if the Speed Profile chosen should be more of a Behavior Profile. Standard should perform passes only to traffic that is slower than the traffic. If traffic is traveling at 75 MPH in a 65 MPH zone, the car should travel at 75 MPH. It should pass traffic that travels slower than this.

Hurry should be more willing to overtake cars, travel more than 10 MPH over the limit, and act as if someone is in a hurry to get somewhere, hence the name. Setting strict limits on how fast it will travel seems to be a real damper on its capabilities. It did much better in previous versions.

Some Speed Profiles are Too Distant from Others

This is specifically about Hurry and Mad Max, which are neighbors in the Speed Profiles menu. Hurry will only go 10 MPH over the limit, but Mad Max will travel similarly to traffic around it. I’ve seen some people say Mad Max is too slow, but I have not had that opinion when using it.

In a 55 MPH zone during Black Friday and Small Business Saturday, it is not unusual for traffic around me to travel in the low to mid-80s. Mad Max was very suitable for some traffic situations yesterday, especially as cars were traveling very fast. However, sometimes it required me to “gear down” into Hurry, especially as, at times, it would try to pass slower traffic in the right lane, a move I’m not super fond of.

We had some readers also mention this to us:

After switching from Mad Max to Hurry, there is a very abrupt drop in speed. It is not violent by any means, but it does shift your body forward, and it seems as if it is a tad drastic and could be refined further.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla’s most affordable car is coming to the Netherlands

The trim is expected to launch at €36,990, making it the most affordable Model 3 the Dutch market has seen in years.

Published

on

Tesla is preparing to introduce the Model 3 Standard to the Netherlands this December, as per information obtained by AutoWeek. The trim is expected to launch at €36,990, making it the most affordable Model 3 the Dutch market has seen in years. 

While Tesla has not formally confirmed the vehicle’s arrival, pricing reportedly comes from a reliable source, the publication noted.

Model 3 Standard lands in NL

The U.S. version of the Model 3 Standard provides a clear preview of what Dutch buyers can expect, such as a no-frills configuration that maintains the recognizable Model 3 look without stripping the car down to a bare interior. The panoramic glass roof is still there, the exterior design is unchanged, and Tesla’s central touchscreen-driven cabin layout stays intact.

Cost reductions come from targeted equipment cuts. The American variant uses fewer speakers, lacks ventilated front seats and heated rear seats, and swaps premium materials for cloth and textile-heavy surfaces. Performance is modest compared with the Premium models, with a 0–100 km/h sprint of about six seconds and an estimated WLTP range near 550 kilometers. 

Despite the smaller battery and simpler suspension, the Standard maintains the long-distance capability drivers have come to expect in a Tesla.

Advertisement
-->

Pricing strategy aligns with Dutch EV demand and taxation shifts

At €36,990, the Model 3 Standard fits neatly into Tesla’s ongoing lineup reshuffle. The current Model 3 RWD has crept toward €42,000, creating space for a more competitive entry-level option, and positioning the new Model 3 Standard comfortably below the €39,990 Model Y Standard.

The timing aligns with rising Dutch demand for affordable EVs as subsidies like SEPP fade and tax advantages for electric cars continue to wind down, EVUpdate noted. Buyers seeking a no-frills EV with solid range are then likely to see the new trim as a compelling alternative.

With the U.S. variant long established and the Model Y Standard already available in the Netherlands, the appearance of an entry-level Model 3 in the Dutch configurator seems like a logical next step.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Model Y is still China’s best-selling premium EV through October

The premium-priced SUV outpaced rivals despite a competitive field, while the Model 3 also secured an impressive position.

Published

on

Credit: Grok Imagine

The Tesla Model Y led China’s top-selling pure electric vehicles in the 200,000–300,000 RMB segment through October 2025, as per Yiche data compiled from China Passenger Car Association (CPCA) figures.

The premium-priced SUV outpaced rivals despite a competitive field, while the Model 3 also secured an impressive position.

The Model Y is still unrivaled

The Model Y’s dominance shines in Yiche’s October report, topping the chart for vehicles priced between 200,000 and 300,000 RMB. With 312,331 units retailed from January through October, the all-electric crossover was China’s best-selling EV in the 200,000–300,000 RMB segment.

The Xiaomi SU7 is a strong challenger at No. 2 with 234,521 units, followed by the Tesla Model 3, which achieved 146,379 retail sales through October. The Model Y’s potentially biggest rival, the Xiaomi YU7, is currently at No. 4 with 80,855 retail units sold.

Efficiency kings

The Model 3 and Model Y recently claimed the top two spots in Autohome’s latest real-world energy-consumption test, outperforming a broad field of Chinese-market EVs under identical 120 km/h cruising conditions with 375 kg payload and fixed 24 °C cabin temperature. The Model 3 achieved 20.8 kWh/100 km while the Model Y recorded 21.8 kWh/100 km, reaffirming Tesla’s efficiency lead.

The results drew immediate attention from Xiaomi CEO Lei Jun, who publicly recognized Tesla’s advantage while pledging continued refinement for his brand’s lineup.

Advertisement
-->

“The Xiaomi SU7’s energy consumption performance is also very good; you can take a closer look. The fact that its test results are weaker than Tesla’s is partly due to objective reasons: the Xiaomi SU7 is a C-segment car, larger and with higher specifications, making it heavier and naturally increasing energy consumption. Of course, we will continue to learn from Tesla and further optimize its energy consumption performance!” Lei Jun wrote in a post on Weibo.

Continue Reading