News
SpaceX readies Falcon 9 Block 5s for bi-coastal launches and landings
After several months of preparation behind the scenes, SpaceX’s second and third serial Falcon 9 Block 5 rockets are ready for the first launches of the upgraded vehicle from Vandenberg Air Force Base, CA (VAFB) and Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, FL (CCAFS).
On the calendar for 1:50 am EDT/5:50 UTC July 22 and 4:39 am PDT/11:39 UTC July 25, SpaceX launches of Telstar 19V and Iridium NEXT-7 are set to mark the beginning of a new era for the company, where all future missions will fly with Block 5 hardware upgraded for reusability and reliability and attempt recovery almost without fail.

Three Falcon 9 boosters captured in various states of transport and testing over the last six weeks, two of which are B1047 and B1048. (Teslarati/Tesla Motors Club/Reddit/Facebook)
Bursting out of the expendable rocket cocoon
While it may be the case that an odd launch or two require a booster be expended to prevent schedule delays or carry an exceptionally heavy satellite to an exceptionally high orbit, it’s safe to say that such a mission with Block 5 boosters will be an anomaly. Somewhat iffy comments posted on Reddit recently claimed that Falcon Block 5 boosters would be able to easily (and rapidly) hop between roles as side and center boosters for both Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy. While wild, those claims, in retrospect, make a lot of sense, even if the reality of Block 5 booster interchangeability was a tad exaggerated.
If SpaceX truly wants to end the practice of expending rocket boosters, – and eventually fairings and upper stages, with any luck – the company will truly need to embrace a strategy that’s long been floated by executives like CEO Elon Musk and COO/President Gwynne Shotwell. That strategy dictates that SpaceX routinely use both Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy as an almost interchangeable and rocket team capable of launching nearly every orbital payload conceivable today, all while remaining in fully or mostly reusable modes of operation.
- B1046 returned to Port Canaveral shortly after its May 4 debut, and is now being carefully analyzed as pathfinder hardware. (Tom Cross)
- OCISLY as seen by Tom Cross on March 5, readying for a busy future of rocket recoveries. (Tom Cross)
- At the request of a friend, artist David Romax put together a truly jaw-dropping collection of concept art featuring SpaceX’s BFR rocket and its Cargo and Crew spaceships. (Gravitation Innovation/David Romax)
At the moment, educated estimates of Falcon Heavy’s true performance margins with dual booster landings at SpaceX’s Florida landing zones and center core recovery aboard Of Course I Still Love You (OCISLY) suggest that the Block 5 version of Falcon Heavy should be capable of launching every commercial satellite planned or penciled in for launch over the next five years, at a minimum. Finally, while the Falcon family’s fuel choice of high-grade kerosene (RP-1) and liquid oxygen make the rocket far more compact and energy-dense than alternatives, one downside of that choice is a loss of efficiency, although brute-force strength makes FH a competitive beast for all missions beyond Earth orbit (Mars, Venus, Saturn, asteroids, comets, etc).
However, a fully-expendable Block 5 Falcon Heavy seems to be at least 3X as unlikely as an expendable Block 5 Falcon 9. Nevertheless, CEO Elon Musk made it clear that a nominal Falcon Heavy launch where both side boosters were recovered at sea and the center booster expended could accomplish a full ~85-90% of an entirely expendable mission, and for roughly $95m. As such, a combination of reusable Falcon 9s, reusable Falcon Heavys, and ~30%-expendable Falcon Heavys could successfully complete every plausible commercial and non-commercial launch in the world and do so at the lowest cost for the better part of the next five years, at which point the company’s next-gen Big F____ Rocket (BFR) ought to be operational.
Side boosters landing on droneships & center expended is only ~10% performance penalty vs fully expended. Cost is only slightly higher than an expended F9, so around $95M.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 12, 2018
Telstar 19V and Iridium-7
With any luck, SpaceX’s next two launches will be the first huge step in the direction of that one-stop-shop for competitive transportation to orbit. Teslarati photographer Tom Cross will be setting up remote cameras for the Telstar 19V’s Florida liftoff later this evening, while our West Coast fellow and famed Mr Steven-stalker Pauline Acalin will be setting up her own set of remote cameras for VAFB’s Falcon 9 Block 5 debut on Tuesday.
Static fire test of Falcon 9 complete— targeting July 25 launch of Iridium-7 from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California.
— SpaceX (@SpaceX) July 21, 2018
On the East Coast, drone ship OCISLY has already departed Port Canaveral with a duo of support vessels and a dedicated tugboat, while the West Coast’s Just Read The Instructions (JRTI) will likely take leave of the Port of Los Angeles within 24 hours. Those dual, successful (?) rocket landings will hopefully mark the first of many dozens of missions for F9 boosters B1047 and B1048.
Follow us for live updates, peeks behind the scenes, and photos from Teslarati’s East and West Coast photographers.
Teslarati – Instagram – Twitter
Tom Cross – Twitter
Pauline Acalin – Twitter
Eric Ralph – Twitter
News
Tesla China January wholesale sales rise 9% year-on-year
Tesla reported January wholesale sales of 69,129 China-made vehicles, as per data released by the China Passenger Car Association.
Tesla China reported January wholesale sales of 69,129 Giga Shanghai-made vehicles, as per data released by the China Passenger Car Association (CPCA). The figure includes both domestic sales and exports from Gigafactory Shanghai.
The total represented a 9.32% increase from January last year but a 28.86% decline from December’s 97,171 units.
China EV market trends
The CPCA estimated that China’s passenger new energy vehicle wholesale volume reached about 900,000 units in January, up 1% year-on-year but down 42% from December. Demand has been pressured by the start-of-year slow season, a 5% additional purchase tax cost, and uncertainty around the transition of vehicle trade-in subsidies, as noted in a report from CNEV Post.
Market leader BYD sold 210,051 NEVs in January, down 30.11% year-on-year and 50.04% month-on-month, as per data released on February 1. Tesla China’s year-over-year growth then is quite interesting, as the company’s vehicles seem to be selling very well despite headwinds in the market.
Tesla China’s strategies
To counter weaker seasonal demand, Tesla China launched a low-interest financing program on January 6, offering up to seven-year terms on select produced vehicles. The move marked the first time an automaker offered financing of that length in the Chinese market.
Several rivals, including Xiaomi, Li Auto, XPeng, and NIO, later introduced similar incentives. Tesla China then further increased promotions on January 26 by reinstating insurance subsidies for the Model 3 sedan. The CPCA is expected to release Tesla’s China retail sales and export breakdown later this month.
News
Tesla’s Apple CarPlay ambitions are not dead, they’re still in the works
For what it’s worth, as a Tesla owner, I don’t particularly see the need for CarPlay, as I have found the in-car system that the company has developed to be superior. However, many people are in love with CarPlay simply because, when it’s in a car that is capable, it is really great.
Tesla’s Apple CarPlay ambitions appeared to be dead in the water after a large amount of speculation late last year that the company would add the user interface seemed to cool down after several weeks of reports.
However, it appears that CarPlay might make its way to Tesla vehicles after all, as a recent report seems to indicate that it is still being worked on by software teams for the company.
The real question is whether it is truly needed or if it is just a want by so many owners that Tesla is listening and deciding to proceed with its development.
Back in November, Bloomberg reported that Tesla was in the process of testing Apple CarPlay within its vehicles, which was a major development considering the company had resisted adopting UIs outside of its own for many years.
Nearly one-third of car buyers considered the lack of CarPlay as a deal-breaker when buying their cars, a study from McKinsey & Co. outlined. This could be a driving decision in Tesla’s inability to abandon the development of CarPlay in its vehicles, especially as it lost a major advantage that appealed to consumers last year: the $7,500 EV tax credit.
Tesla owners propose interesting theory about Apple CarPlay and EV tax credit
Although we saw little to no movement on it since the November speculation, Tesla is now reportedly in the process of still developing the user interface. Mark Gurman, a Bloomberg writer with a weekly newsletter, stated that CarPlay is “still in the works” at Tesla and that more concrete information will be available “soon” regarding its development.
While Tesla already has a very capable and widely accepted user interface, CarPlay would still be an advantage, considering many people have used it in their vehicles for years. Just like smartphones, many people get comfortable with an operating system or style and are resistant to using a new one. This could be a big reason for Tesla attempting to get it in their own cars.
Tesla gets updated “Apple CarPlay” hack that can work on new models
For what it’s worth, as a Tesla owner, I don’t particularly see the need for CarPlay, as I have found the in-car system that the company has developed to be superior. However, many people are in love with CarPlay simply because, when it’s in a car that is capable, it is really great.
It holds one distinct advantage over Tesla’s UI in my opinion, and that’s the ability to read and respond to text messages, which is something that is available within a Tesla, but is not as user-friendly.
With that being said, I would still give CarPlay a shot in my Tesla. I didn’t particularly enjoy it in my Bronco Sport, but that was because Ford’s software was a bit laggy with it. If it were as smooth as Tesla’s UI, which I think it would be, it could be a really great addition to the vehicle.
News
Tesla brings closure to Model Y moniker with launch of new trim level
With the launch of a new trim level for the Model Y last night, something almost went unnoticed — the loss of a moniker that Tesla just recently added to a couple of its variants of the all-electric crossover.
Tesla launched the Model Y All-Wheel-Drive last night, competitively priced at $41,990, but void of the luxurious features that are available within the Premium trims.
Upon examination of the car, one thing was missing, and it was noticeable: Tesla dropped the use of the “Standard” moniker to identify its entry-level offerings of the Model Y.
The Standard Model Y vehicles were introduced late last year, primarily to lower the entry price after the U.S. EV tax credit changes were made. Tesla stripped some features like the panoramic glass roof, premium audio, ambient lighting, acoustic-lined glass, and some of the storage.
Last night, it simply switched the configurations away from “Standard” and simply as the Model Y Rear-Wheel-Drive and Model Y All-Wheel-Drive.
There are three plausible reasons for this move, and while it is minor, there must be an answer for why Tesla chose to abandon the name, yet keep the “Premium” in its upper-level offerings.
“Standard” carried a negative connotation in marketing
Words like “Standard” can subtly imply “basic,” “bare-bones,” or “cheap” to consumers, especially when directly contrasted with “Premium” on the configurator or website. Dropping it avoids making the entry-level Model Y feel inferior or low-end, even though it’s designed for affordability.
Tesla likely wanted the base trim to sound neutral and spec-focused (e.g., just “RWD” highlights drivetrain rather than feature level), while “Premium” continues to signal desirable upgrades, encouraging upsells to higher-margin variants.
Simplifying the overall naming structure for less confusion
The initial “Standard vs. Premium” split (plus Performance) created a somewhat clunky hierarchy, especially as Tesla added more variants like Standard Long Range in some markets or the new AWD base.
Removing “Standard” streamlines things to a more straightforward progression (RWD → AWD → Premium RWD/AWD → Performance), making the lineup easier to understand at a glance. This aligns with Tesla’s history of iterative naming tweaks to reduce buyer hesitation.
Elevating brand perception and protecting perceived value
Keeping “Premium” reinforces that the bulk of the Model Y lineup (especially the popular Long Range models) remains a premium product with desirable features like better noise insulation, upgraded interiors, and tech.
Eliminating “Standard” prevents any dilution of the Tesla brand’s upscale image—particularly important in a competitive EV market—while the entry-level variants can quietly exist as accessible “RWD/AWD” options without drawing attention to them being decontented versions.
You can check out the differences between the “Standard” and “Premium” Model Y vehicles below:
@teslarati There are some BIG differences between the Tesla Model Y Standard and Tesla Model Y Premium #tesla #teslamodely ♬ Sia – Xeptemper



