News
SpaceX fires up Falcon 9 rockets hours apart for back to back launches
SpaceX has fired up two separate Falcon 9 rockets at two separate Florida launch pads in less than 16 hours ahead of back to back launches for Starlink and the US military.
Around 6:30 pm local on June 24th, SpaceX successfully static fired Falcon 9 B1051 as one of the last steps before the booster’s fifth launch, making it the third SpaceX rocket to reach that five-flight milestone in just three months. B1051.4 just narrowly missed SpaceX’s booster turnaround record, falling just a few days short of the current 62-day record after some minor delays. Originally scheduled to launch as early as June 22nd, the ninth batch of Starlink v1.0 satellites (Starlink V1 L9 or Starlink-9) is now scheduled to launch no earlier than (NET) 4:18 pm EDT (20:18 UTC) on Friday, June 26th.
A little over fifteen hours after B1051’s – apparently – successful static fire (there was no SpaceX tweet confirmation for the first time ever) at Kennedy Space Center Launch Complex 39A (Pad 39A), new Falcon 9 booster B1060 performed its own ignition test at SpaceX’s separate Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS) LC-40 pad. SpaceX confirmed that that static fire was successful, putting the new Falcon 9 rocket on track to launch the US military’s third upgraded GPS satellite (GPS III SV03) no earlier than (NET) 3:56 pm EDT (19:56 UTC) on Tuesday, June 30th.
If SpaceX manages to complete both the Starlink-9 and GPS III SV03 missions on schedule, June 2020 will be the company’s first four-launch month ever. Even if the latter US military mission is delayed to July 3rd or 4th, SpaceX will still have technically completed four launches in a month’s worth of days (30-31). Normally, the odds of the second in a pair of back-to-back launches being delayed would be quite high, given that any delay to the first mission would inherently roll over onto the follow-up. For SpaceX, that likelihood is more than doubled because of the need for drone ship availability for booster recovery.
However, SpaceX debuted a second East Coast drone ship – Just Read The Instructions (JRTI) on June 3rd, complimenting drone ship Of Course I Still Love You (OCISLY) to double the company’s sea recovery capacity on the East Coast. Formerly stationed at Port of Los Angeles to support SpaceX launches out of California, the West Coast manifest rapidly dried up and made drone ship JRTI’s move East all but inevitable.
On top of having a second drone ship available for booster recoveries just days or even hours apart, SpaceX also recently began pushing the limits of its East Coast launch capacity by performing launches just days apart from its two separate Florida pads. While the occasional back-to-back launch from LC-40 and Pad 39A isn’t unprecedented, SpaceX appears to be intent on sustaining launches from each pad every 10-20 days, give or take. As such, SpaceX’s Starlink-9 and GPS III SV03 missions will launch from separate pads and land on separate drone ships.
Cadence ambitions aside, Starlink-9 and GPS III SV03 are also significant missions for their own reasons. Up first, Starlink-9 will hopefully follow on the heels of SpaceX’s successful June 13th Starlink-8 launch to become the second Starlink rideshare mission, sending two BlackSky imaging satellites into orbit along with 57 Starlink v1.0 satellites. The fact that booster B1051 has nearly broken SpaceX’s rocket reuse turnaround record also suggests that the company is already confident in the flightworthiness of Falcon 9 boosters heading into their fifth launches.
Meanwhile, GPS III SV03 is special because – unlike SpaceX’s first GPS III SV01 launch in December 2018 – the US Air (Space) Force will allow Falcon 9 booster B1060 to attempt a drone ship landing. On SpaceX’s first GPS III launch, the USAF more or less arbitrarily limited Falcon 9’s available performance to leave extreme safety margins in the apparent event of one or more booster engines failing during launch. As a result, Falcon 9 B1054 became the first highly-reusable Block 5 booster to intentionally launch just once. For B1060, the booster will thankfully have a shot at recovery and a long and productive life of 5-10+ more launches. A successful landing could also give the US military its first shot at certifying and reusing a Falcon 9 booster on an operational military satellite launch.
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
