News
SpaceX Falcon 9 Block 5 will usher in a new era of rapid reuse rockets
Despite all missions being readily in the range of recovery, SpaceX has only attempted to recover its Falcon boosters after two of the company’s five 2018 launches. If anything, the attachment to Falcon boosters and the apparent melancholy felt by many observers when they are not recovered is a testament to the staggeringly abrupt success of SpaceX’s reusable rocketry program.
- Falcon Heavy’s side boosters seconds away from near-simultaneous landings at Landing Zones 1 and 2. (SpaceX)
- GovSat’s Falcon 9 1032 spotted in one piece by Elon Musk after a soft-landing in the Atlantic. (Elon Musk)
Aside from Falcon Heavy’s center core and 1044, each booster expended in the last several months (Iridium-4, GovSat-1, and PAZ) was aging, flight-proven, and nearing the end of its operational life: Block 3 and Block 4 Falcon 9s were simply not designed or expected to fly more than two or three times total. Their seemingly premature deaths were thus a necessary step along the path to Block 5 and truly rapid and cheap booster reuse; perhaps as pragmatic as quite literally making space for new and superior hardware at SpaceX’s many facilities. The demise of Falcon Heavy’s center core nevertheless made for a spectacular video (skip to 1:10, or watch the whole thing…).
The end (of old Falcons) is nigh
Despite the carnage in recent times, the next two weeks are likely to see several more flight-proven Falcon 9s meet their timely, watery demise, or at least complete their final flight in the case of CRS-14.
- Iridium-5 (NET March 29) will be flying atop Booster (B) 1041, previously used for Iridium-3 (Oct. 2017)
- CRS-14 (NET April 2) will make use of B1039, a booster that debuted with the launch of CRS-12 (Aug. 2017)
- Iridium-6/GRACE-FO (NET April 28) was confirmed just yesterday to be flying on B1043, the booster that launched the now-infamous Zuma spysat this January
- Lastly, SES-12 (NET April 30) will likely use B1040, which orbited the USAF’s secretive X-37B spaceplane in Sept. 2017
- Booster 1041 arrives in Port of San Pedro, CA in Oct. 2017 after successfully completing its first launch. (Pauline Acalin)
- Booster 1039 lands after successfully launching CRS-12’s Cargo Dragon into orbit. 1039 completed its final mission on Monday afternoon, April 2. (SpaceX)
- After landing at LZ-1, B1043 was refurbished in approximately four months. (SpaceX)
- Falcon 9 B1040 returns to LZ-1 after the launch of the USAF’s X-37B spaceplane. (SpaceX)
While more than a little hard to believe, this series of launches over the next 4-6 weeks may see SpaceX’s fleet of flight-proven boosters shrink to no more than two flightworthy cores – perhaps just a single Falcon 9. The launch of NASA’s exoplanet observatory TESS – set to use the brand new Falcon 9 B1045 – will likely see one additional flight after landing at LZ-1 or OCISLY in mid-April. The final flight-proven booster known to exist in a potentially flightworthy state is B1042, famous for its moderate attempt at self-immolation and Roomba-murder (correction: the Roomba murder attempt was actually a few weeks before, during the landing of SES-11’s flight-proven booster) after the successful launch of Koreasat-5A in Oct. 2017. B1042’s future is unknown at this point, however, as the post-landing fire may have damaged the booster beyond repair.
Rounding out SpaceX’s entire fleet of boosters, at least after SES-12, are the flight-proven B1045, the first-ever Block 5 booster (B1046) – flight-proven after Bangabandhu-1, and the second Block 5 booster (B1047). Assuming that Block 5’s first hot-fire testing has gone well at SpaceX’s McGregor, TX facilities, it’s probable that B1048 and perhaps B1049 will roll out of the Hawthorne factory and head to Texas for their own tests between now and then.
https://www.instagram.com/p/BgfboKIB17H/
TL;DR: SpaceX is betting heavily on Block 5
The purpose of this brief jaunt through the annals of SpaceX’s rocket fleet and production goals is to demonstrate just how aggressively SpaceX has bet on Block 5 – both on its success as a new and complex technological system and as an unprecedentedly reusable orbital-class rocket. If any design or manufacturing flaws are discovered in the first several Block 5 Falcon 9s, or if Block 5 turns out to be less reusable than SpaceX hopes, the company could well find its manifested launch dates slipping as flightworthy boosters – not satellites – become the bottleneck for access to orbit.
Nevertheless, SpaceX has at least six full-up Falcon 9 boosters in various stages of integration and completion at their Hawthorne factory, as well as 1046 in (or departing) Texas and 1047 presumably on its way there. SpaceX certainly has a strong track record of introducing its many upgraded iterations of Falcon 9 in the past – fingers crossed that that trend continues with Block 5. If SpaceX’s confidence still rings true a month or two from today, a new era of access to space will have truly begun, and SpaceX will be able to quite rapidly refocus a considerable portion of its workforce on getting to Mars.
- SpaceX Block 5 Falcon9 at McGregor, Texas [Credit: Chris G – NSF via Twitter, Reprinted with permission from NASASpaceflight.com]
- SpaceX continues a cautious regiment of tests for the newest Falcon 9 upgrade, Block 5. (Reddit /u/HollywoodSX)
Follow us for live updates, behind-the-scenes sneak peeks, and a sea of beautiful photos from our East and West coast photographers.
Teslarati – Instagram – Twitter
Tom Cross – Twitter
Pauline Acalin – Twitter
Eric Ralph – Twitter
News
SpaceX tells the FCC that Starship Flight 14 is going to orbit
SpaceX filed with the FCC for Starship Flight 14, its first true orbital launch attempt.
SpaceX has asked the Federal Communications Commission for permission to fly Starlink terminals during Starship’s fourteenth flight test, and the filing lays out a genuine trip to orbit, something the program has never attempted.
Every Starship flight so far, including Flight 13’s successful splashdown in the Indian Ocean on July 24, has flown a suborbital arc that ends with the ship reentering the atmosphere within the same hour it launches. The FCC paperwork describes a mission profile built around an actual orbital insertion instead.
The payload is the other half of the story. Flight 13 carried 20 production Starlink V3 satellites, but because that mission never reached orbit, the satellites reentered along with the ship rather than joining the constellation, something Teslarati covered in detail after SpaceX released footage shot from one of those satellites as it drifted away from Starship in space. Flight 14 is designed to close that gap. If the orbital insertion holds, the roughly 20 V3 satellites onboard would separate into an operational orbit and could eventually go into service, each one rated for about 1 terabit per second of downlink capacity by SpaceX’s own account.
SpaceX announces new Starbase for ‘thousands of Starship launches annually’
Elon Musk first flagged the orbital attempt during SpaceX’s August 4 earnings call, the company’s first as a public entity following its June IPO under the ticker SPCX. He also floated catching the ship with the Starbase tower on the same flight, an idea he walked back on August 20, saying the catch attempt would more likely come “in a few months,” as Teslarati reported at the time. Flight 14 will instead target a splashdown for the ship in the Indian Ocean, the same recovery method used since Flight 12.
Hardware has been catching up to the ambition. Booster 21 completed a full 33-engine static fire on August 28, and Ship 41 finished its own six-engine test the week before. An airspace briefing circulated to pilots on August 20 listed September 15 as the target date, later than the end of August window Musk mentioned on the earnings call, though SpaceX has not confirmed a launch date publicly and Starship schedules routinely slip while hardware and FAA paperwork line up.
The FCC filing itself does not guarantee a launch date. It covers communications authority, and not flight readiness, considering SpaceX still needs Ship 41 fully stacked and cleared by the FAA before Flight 14 can fly. But the filing is a real marker of intent and it puts a specific regulatory process behind what had so far only been Musk’s word on the earnings call.
News
Tesla Cybercab Event: what to expect from Austin
Tesla is set to launch Cybercab on Thursday at an event in Austin, Texas, which will officially bring the company’s first steering wheel-less and pedal-less vehicle to a limited number of consumers for the first time.
The event, which is invite-only, is still thin on details: we’ll be there, and it seems the event will be held at Gigafactory Texas, but the launch of this vehicle truly relies on it being operational outside of the factory and on public roads.
🚨 Close-Up look at Tesla Cybercab without steering wheel: pic.twitter.com/9TXCDeDCz7
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 3, 2026
Nevertheless, there are some big things to expect, and other things to temper expectations on. For what it’s worth, we believe this event could be perhaps the biggest indication that Tesla is ready to truly enter a new phase and chapter in its historic story.
Tesla Cybercab’s First Foray into the Public with Real-World Riders
Cybercab will likely hit the streets of Austin and the surrounding areas, likely in the established geofence that Tesla has expanded on for the past 14 months. Just yesterday, Tesla expanded it once again by 9 percent.
Tesla will put, for the first time, a vehicle without any manual controls on public roads, likely without any help from teleoperators. This is a truly groundbreaking development if it comes through in this fashion: it would be groundbreaking for Tesla to roll out a truly driverless ride-hailing vehicle.
Cybercab Has Already Been Unveiled
This is not an unveiling event. Cybercab has been released for nearly two years, as Tesla first showed it to the public on October 10, 2024.
FIRST LOOK: Tesla ‘Cybercab’ Robotaxi makes its global debut
While there is some small speculation that Tesla could release the Roadster at the event as a surprise, it seems more likely the focus will be on the Cybercab and the huge accomplishment that will come with releasing a vehicle with no manual controls.
There Will Be a Lot of Hype
What’s important to remember about the Cybercab event is that Tesla will continue to prioritize safety and the rollout will likely be slow, just as it has been with Robotaxi.
One of the biggest complaints about Robotaxi is vehicle population, and the fact that the wait for a ride, at least in some instances, has been longer than most want to admit.
It will take time for this project to truly scale. It will take time for Tesla to roll this out in a large fashion. The important thing to note is that they are doing it, and they’re doing it with a vehicle that is completely engineered and built internally. That’s something no other ride-hailing service can say.
Elon Musk
SpaceX would not exist if this crucial early launch failed, Musk says
Elon Musk recently restated a fact that still defines SpaceX’s origin story: if Falcon 1’s fourth launch had failed, the company would not exist. The comment answered a reminder that after three consecutive losses, SpaceX had money for only one more attempt.
On X, Peter Diamandis said that the present-day acknowledgement of SpaceX’s success does not discount the rough start the company had. “Almost nobody remembers that Elon’s first rocket failed three times, and there was money for exactly only one more attempt.”
Musk said, “If the 4th launch had failed, SpaceX would not exist.”
If the 4th launch had failed, SpaceX would not exist
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) August 30, 2026
In late 2008, the firm was nearly out of cash. Another failure would have ended payroll, closed the Hawthorne factory, and left the Falcon 9 and Dragon programs as unfinished drawings.
The first flight lifted off from Omelek Island on 24 March 2006. Thirty-three seconds later, a corroded aluminum fitting on a fuel line leaked. Kerosene ignited around the Merlin engine, control was lost, and the vehicle came apart. The small DARPA payload, FalconSAT-2, survived the short flight only to land on a storage shed near the pad. Investigators later traced the fitting to a materials mix-up that should never have reached the rocket.
Flight 2, on 21 March 2007, looked far better at first. The first stage burned cleanly and handed off to the Kestrel-powered upper stage. The vehicle crossed 100 kilometers and reached a peak of about 289 kilometers. Then propellant slosh in the second-stage tank started a circular coning motion that grew until the engine shut down. Telemetry faded as the stage tumbled, and SpaceX had reached space but not orbit. Over the next year, the team redesigned everything from the ground up, including tanks, baffles, and the new regeneratively cooled Merlin 1C.
That engine flew on Flight 3 on 2 August 2008. The first stage performed almost perfectly and reached 217 kilometers. After main-engine cutoff, leftover fuel in the cooling channels produced a faint residual thrust, roughly 10 pounds per square inch of chamber pressure. On a Texas test stand, the effect was invisible beneath ambient air pressure. In vacuum it was enough to push the spent first stage back into the second stage after separation. The stages collided, the upper stage spun, and the mission was lost. Musk later said a slightly longer delay before staging would have saved the flight.
Six weeks later, the team assembled Flight 4 from remaining parts and flew it on 28 September 2008 at 23:15 UTC. The payload was Ratsat, a 165-kilogram aluminum mass simulator built in-house. Staging was delayed so residual thrust could decay. The Kestrel ignited, the fairing split away, and nine and a half minutes after liftoff the vehicle was in orbit. After a coast, the second stage restarted, settling into a 621-by-643-kilometer path at 9.35 degrees inclination. Falcon 1 became the first privately developed liquid-fueled rocket to reach Earth orbit. Musk called the insertion “middle of the bull’s-eye.”
SpaceX restores a Falcon 1 rocket for 10th anniversary of first launch success
That success unlocked NASA’s Commercial Resupply Services award later that year. Without it, there would have been no Falcon 9, no reusable first stages, and no Dragon cargo or crew flights to the International Space Station. Launch prices would have remained far higher. Starlink’s constellation would not exist; broadband from low Earth orbit would still be a paper concept.
Ride-share markets, high launch cadence, and the current pace of lunar and Mars hardware would be years behind. Communications, Earth observation, and the cost of putting anything into space would look more like the 2000s than the 2020s.
One extra second of residual thrust in August 2008 would have written a different decade.







