SpaceX
SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket lands for the last time ahead of risky in-flight abort test
SpaceX’s latest successful launch and landing has wrapped up with Israeli Moon lander Beresheet on its way to Earth’s neighbor, Indonesian communications satellite PSN-6 headed to its final orbit, and the second thrice-flown Falcon 9 Block 5 booster safely returned to Port Canaveral aboard drone ship Of Course I Still Love You (OCISLY).
Known as Falcon 9 B1048, its third successful landing and recovery will almost certainly be this booster’s last after its fourth launch was officially assigned to a critical Crew Dragon launch abort test, one that the booster is very unlikely to survive. According to SpaceX CEO Elon Musk, that test could occur as early as April and will push the first flight-proven Crew Dragon space capsule to its limits.
https://twitter.com/_TomCross_/status/1099688043009753088
After weathering what Musk also described as the toughest reentry and heating conditions yet experience by a Falcon 9 booster meant for recovery, Falcon 9 B1048 landing (almost) flawlessly aboard drone ship OCISLY, stationed roughly 700 km (430 mi) off the Florida coast. Hinted at by the booster’s very slight lean on the recovery vessel’s deck, B1048 most likely cut thrust (or ran out of fuel) just before the optimal stop point, causing the rocket to fall a few unintended feet onto OCISLY and eat into part of the aluminum honeycomb ‘crush-core’ present on all Falcon landing legs.
Reentry, even at 1/4 of orbital speed is hard pic.twitter.com/Tk2KJblWH5
— Scott Manley (@DJSnM) February 22, 2019
In essence, that crushable aluminum acts as a very rough form of emergency suspension meant to minimize potential damage to the fragile structure of Falcon booster propellant tanks at the cost of its landing legs. In the case of B1048’s third landing, the lean appears to be no more than a few degrees – scarcely out of the ordinary, at least relative to past leaning boosters. Most notably, Falcon 9 B1023 experienced a similar anomaly and a far worse lean after its first landing, an experience that did not apparently impact its ability to launch for the second time as a side booster for Falcon Heavy’s inaugural launch.
-
- Falcon 9 B1048 returned to Port Canaveral on February 24th after its third successful launch and landing. (Teslarati)
-
- B1048.3 beside its human caretakers. (Tom Cross)
-
- Octagrabber robots are meant to prevent boosters from sliding off of drone ship decks by anchoring them with their tank-like weight. (Teslarati)
B1048’s slight departure from a perfect trajectory should thus pose no problem for in-place plans for the rocket’s fourth (and likely final) launch. Known as Crew Dragon’s in-flight abort (IFA) test, SpaceX specifically requested the inclusion of a second abort test (above and beyond NASA’s testing requirements) to fully verify that astronauts could be pulled to safety at any point during launch. In 2015, the company completed a pad abort test of Crew Dragon, demonstrating that the spacecraft could escape from a failing rocket while static on the launch pad. The in-flight abort is precisely what it sounds like: a demonstration that Crew Dragon can safely escape a failing rocket while in flight. More than simply being in flight, the goal is to demonstrate a successful abort at the point of peak aerodynamic stress of Falcon 9 and Dragon, known as Max Q.
For Cargo Dragon launches, Falcon 9 has typically averaged dynamic forces of about 25 kPa (~4 psi), roughly equivalent to 2.5 tons of force per square meter. During launch, either the payload fairing or Cargo/Crew Dragon are subjected directly to those forces, often requiring a significant period of lower throttle to mitigate the forces those sensitive assemblies experience. Given that Crew Dragon’s abort scenario accelerates the capsule and trunk from a relative speed of zero to nearly 350 mph (150 m/s) in five seconds, the dynamic forces (i.e. mechanical loads and heating) the spacecraft is experiencing could jump 50% or more almost instantaneously.
-
- Falcon 9 B1054 around the time of Max Q. (Tom Cross)
-
- While it doesn’t necessarily correlate with Max Q, vapor cones like the one on B1047’s fairing are a partial visualization of Max Q forces. (SpaceX)
-
- An official SpaceX render shows Falcon 9 and Crew Dragon lifting off from Pad 39A. (SpaceX)
-
- Falcon 9 B1051 and Crew Dragon vertical at Pad 39A. (SpaceX)
After Crew Dragon aborts, the Falcon 9 stack – featuring B1048 and a full-fidelity upper stage with a mass simulator in place of its MVac engine – will be instantaneously exposed to those same dynamic forces, experientially equivalent to bellyflopping from an Olympic-height diving platform. The upper stage may actually be better off than the booster thanks to the generally smooth dome at its stern, whereas Falcon 9’s booster would have its interstage – a deep, open cylinder – exposed to the same airflow if or when the upper stage is torn away. At the point of abort, Falcon 9 will most likely be in the process of shutting down its Merlin 1D engines, effectively removing the booster’s control authority and leaving it at the mercy of the atmosphere. SpaceX’s CRS-7 Cargo Dragon failure (caused by the second stage losing structural integrity mid-flight) is actually a decent representation of what is likely to happen to B1048 and its upper stage.
Given the potential destructive power B1048 will face, not to mention the fact that the booster will likely not have grid fins or landing legs installed, today’s recovery will probably be the last time the rocket returns to port and prepares for another launch. Explicitly dependent upon the refurbishment of DM-1’s Crew Dragon capsule, SpaceX’s in-flight abort is not expected to occur until June 2019, although Musk has indicated that the aspirational target is to perform the test as early as April, perhaps less than 60 days after the capsule is scheduled to land in the Atlantic Ocean.
Check out Teslarati’s newsletters for prompt updates, on-the-ground perspectives, and unique glimpses of SpaceX’s rocket launch and recovery processes!
Elon Musk
Musk company boycott proposal at City Council meeting gets weird and ironic
The City of Davis in California held a weekly city council meeting on Tuesday, where it voted on a proposal to ban Musk-operated companies. It got weird and ironic.
A city council meeting in California that proposed banning the entry of new contracts with companies controlled by Elon Musk got weird and ironic on Tuesday night after councilmembers were forced to admit some of the entities would benefit the community.
The City of Davis in California held a weekly city council meeting on Tuesday, where it voted on a proposal called “Resolution Ending Engagement With Elon Musk-Controlled Companies and To Encourage CalPERS To Divest Stock In These Companies.”
The proposal claimed that Musk ” has used his influence and corporate platforms to promote political ideologies and activities that threaten democratic norms and institutions, including campaign finance activities that raise ethical and legal concerns.”
We reported on it on Tuesday before the meeting:
California city weighs banning Elon Musk companies like Tesla and SpaceX
However, the meeting is now published online, and it truly got strange.
While it was supported by various members of the community, you could truly tell who was completely misinformed about the influence of Musk’s companies, their current status from an economic and competitive standpoint, and how much some of Musk’s companies’ projects benefit the community.
City Council Member Admits Starlink is Helpful
One City Council member was forced to admit that Starlink, the satellite internet project established by Musk’s SpaceX, was beneficial to the community because the emergency response system utilized it for EMS, Fire, and Police communications in the event of a power outage.
After public comments were heard, councilmembers amended some of the language in the proposal to not include Starlink because of its benefits to public safety.
One community member even said, “There should be exceptions to the rule.”
🚨 After the City of Davis, California, held its City Council meeting on Tuesday and voted on a resolution called “Resolution Ending Engagement With Elon Musk-Controlled Companies and To Encourage CalPERS To Divest Stock In These Companies,” it was forced to admit that it needs… pic.twitter.com/hQiCIX3yll
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) February 19, 2026
Community Members Report Out of Touch Mainstream Media Narratives
Many community members very obviously read big bold headlines about how horribly Tesla is performing in terms of electric vehicles. Many pointed to “labor intimidation” tactics being used at the company’s Fremont Factory, racial discrimination lawsuits, and Musk’s political involvement as clear-cut reasons why Davis should not consider his companies for future contracts.
However, it was interesting to hear some of them speak, very obviously out of touch with reality.
Musk has encouraged unions to propose organizing at the Fremont Factory, stating that many employees would not be on board because they are already treated very well. In 2022, he invited Union leaders to come to Fremont “at their convenience.”
The UAW never took the opportunity.
Some have argued that Tesla prevented pro-union clothing at Fremont, which it did for safety reasons. An appeals court sided with Tesla, stating that the company had a right to enforce work uniforms to ensure employee safety.
Another community member said that Tesla was losing market share in the U.S. due to growing competition from legacy automakers.
“Plus, these existing auto companies have learned a lot from what Tesla has done,” she said. Interestingly, Ford, General Motors, and Stellantis have all pulled back from their EV ambitions significantly. All three took billions in financial hits.
One Resident Crosses a Line
One resident’s time at the podium included this:
Another member of the community did this…a member of the City Council admonished him and it came to a verbal spat https://t.co/zWvKCiCkie pic.twitter.com/1L334qq9av
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) February 19, 2026
He was admonished by City Council member Bapu Vaitla, who said his actions were offensive. The two sparred verbally for a few seconds before their argument ended.
City Council Vote Result
Ultimately, the City of Davis chose to pass the motion, but they also amended it to exclude Starlink because of its emergency system benefits.
Elon Musk
California city weighs banning Elon Musk companies like Tesla and SpaceX
A resolution draft titled, “Resolution Ending Engagement With Elon Musk-Controlled Companies and To Encourage CalPERS To Divest Stock In These Companies,” alleges that Musk “has engaged in business practices that are alleged to include violations of labor laws, environmental regulations, workplace safety standards, and regulatory noncompliance.”
A California City Council is planning to weigh whether it would adopt a resolution that would place a ban on its engagement with Elon Musk companies, like Tesla and SpaceX.
The City of Davis, California, will have its City Council weigh a new proposal that would adopt a resolution “to divest from companies owned and/or controlled by Elon Musk.”
This would include a divestment proposal to encourage CalPERS, the California Public Employees Retirement System, to divest from stock in any Musk company.
A resolution draft titled, “Resolution Ending Engagement With Elon Musk-Controlled Companies and To Encourage CalPERS To Divest Stock In These Companies,” alleges that Musk “has engaged in business practices that are alleged to include violations of labor laws, environmental regulations, workplace safety standards, and regulatory noncompliance.”
It claims that Musk “has used his influence and corporate platforms to promote political ideologies and activities that threaten democratic norms and institutions, including campaign finance activities that raise ethical and legal concerns.”
If adopted, Davis would bar the city from entering into any new contracts or purchasing agreements with any company owned or controlled by Elon Musk. It also says it will not consider utilizing Tesla Robotaxis.
Hotel owner tears down Tesla chargers in frustration over Musk’s politics
A staff report on the proposal claims there is “no immediate budgetary impact.” However, a move like this would only impact its residents, especially with Tesla, as the Supercharger Network is open to all electric vehicle manufacturers. It is also extremely reliable and widespread.
Regarding the divestment request to CalPERS, it would not be surprising to see the firm make the move. Although it voted against Musk’s compensation package last year, the firm has no issue continuing to make money off of Tesla’s performance on Wall Street.
The decision to avoid Musk companies will be considered this evening at the City Council meeting.
The report comes from Davis Vanguard.
It is no secret that Musk’s political involvement, especially during the most recent Presidential Election, ruffled some feathers. Other cities considered similar options, like the City of Baltimore, which “decided to go in another direction” after awarding Tesla a $5 million contract for a fleet of EVs for city employees.
Elon Musk
Starlink restrictions are hitting Russian battlefield comms: report
The restrictions have reportedly disrupted Moscow’s drone coordination and frontline communications.
SpaceX’s decision to disable unauthorized Starlink terminals in Ukraine is now being felt on the battlefield, with Ukrainian commanders reporting that Russian troops have struggled to maintain assault operations without access to the satellite network.
The restrictions have reportedly disrupted Moscow’s drone coordination and frontline communications.
Lt. Denis Yaroslavsky, who commands a special reconnaissance unit, stated that Russian assault activity noticeably declined for several days after the shutdown. “For three to four days after the shutdown, they really reduced the assault operations,” Yaroslavsky said.
Russian units had allegedly obtained Starlink terminals through black market channels and mounted them on drones and weapons systems, despite service terms prohibiting offensive military use. Once those terminals were blocked, commanders on the Ukrainian side reported improved battlefield ratios, as noted in a New York Post report.
A Ukrainian unit commander stated that casualty imbalances widened after the cutoff. “On any given day, depending on your scale of analysis, my sector was already achieving 20:1 (casuality rate) before the shutdown, and we are an elite unit. Regular units have no problem going 5:1 or 8:1. With Starlink down, 13:1 (casualty rate) for a regular unit is easy,” the unit commander said.
The restrictions come as Russia faces heavy challenges across multiple fronts. A late January report from the Center for Strategic and International Studies estimated that more than 1.2 million Russian troops have been killed, wounded, or gone missing since February 2022.
The Washington-based Institute for the Study of War also noted that activity from Russia’s Rubikon drone unit declined after Feb. 1, suggesting communications constraints from Starlink’s restrictions may be limiting operations. “I’m sure the Russians have (alternative options), but it takes time to maximize their implementation and this (would take) at least four to six months,” Yaroslavsky noted.
Tesla Full Self-Driving set to get an awesome new feature, Elon Musk says
Elon Musk clarifies Tesla Cybertruck ’10 day’ comment, fans respond
