News
SpaceX’s Falcon 9 and Heavy manifest grows lopsided as launches align for Q4
For a variety of reasons both clear or otherwise, a significant number of SpaceX’s Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launches initially scheduled near the beginning or middle of the second half of 2018 are all slipping right into October, November, and December.
While communications satellite Telstar 18V’s two-week slip to NET September 8 and SAOCOM-1A’s own several-week tumble to October 7th appear to have their own respective and discernible reasons, namely some sort of range or payload issue (Telstar) and difficulties with the Falcon 9 rocket (SAOCOM), it’s much harder to know why multiple other payloads have slipped into late 2018.
Although the multiple slips and slides of several payloads and much of SpaceX’s H2 2018 launch manifest may be hard to parse alongside the year’s milestone first half, at least two reliable launch manifest sources (SpaceflightNow and one other) more or less independently corroborate the apparent realignment. Explanations, however, are far harder to find – to be expected in the business of space launch. Still, multiple launch delays can be traced to either payload or rocket issues.
-
- SpaceX technicians wrench on Merlin 1D and Merlin Vacuum engines. Raptor was apparently dramatically larger in person. (SpaceX)
-
- SpaceX technicians wrench on Merlin 1D and Merlin Vacuum engines. (SpaceX)
-
- SpaceX technicians wrench on Merlin 1D and Merlin Vacuum engines. (SpaceX)
Payload-side delays aplenty but rocket-slips, too
Iridium CEO Matt Desch, for example, noted that his company’s Iridium NEXT-8 launch of the constellation’s final 10 satellites is slipping from its original launch date target because of delays preparing the satellites for launch, rather than any issue with SpaceX rocket availability. While not official, the Falcon 9 launch of communications satellite Es’hail-2 has also rapidly jumped from the end of August or early September into Q4 2018 (likely NET October or November), hinting heavily at payload processing delays or technical issues with the complex satellite, as multi-month rocket-side delays would likely preclude interim September and October launches.
Still trying to nail the date down (satellite completion is gating, not rocket availability), but definitely won't be in September.
— Matt Desch (@IridiumBoss) August 13, 2018
Meanwhile, at least two of those prospective Q4 2018 SpaceX launches happen to be rideshare-dedicated, meaning that the payload consists of dozens of smaller satellites manifested and organized by a middleman company or agency. These two launches are Spaceflight’s SSO-A launch (~70 satellites) – currently NET November 2018 – and the US Air Force-led STP-2 mission, designed primarily to help SpaceX certify Falcon Heavy for Air Force launches while also placing roughly two dozen smaller satellites into orbit. STP-2 was delayed for multiple years as SpaceX gradually paced towards Falcon Heavy’s first real launch debut (February 2018), but launch delays (currently NET November 30 2018, probably 2019) will likely be caused by some combination of rocket, payload, and pad delays as SpaceX readies for what is essentially the second debut of much different Falcon Heavy.
While likely less a payload-side delay than a mountain-of-tedious-paperwork-and-bureaucracy delay, SpaceX’s NET November 2018 inaugural (uncrewed) demonstration launch of Crew Dragon, NASA scheduling documents published alongside an August 27 Advisory Council presentation suggest that the spacecraft will be ready for launch as early as September, whereas independent sources and visual observations have confirmed that the new Falcon 9 Block 5 booster (B1051) is either near the end or fully done with its McGregor, Texas acceptance testing. One certainly cannot blame SpaceX or NASA for caution at this stage, but the consequently uncertain launch debut of Crew Dragon almost certainly precludes any Falcon Heavy launches from Pad 39A in the interim, including STP-2’s theoretical NET November 30 launch date, which is literally inside Crew Dragon’s “November 2018” launch target.
-
- Falcon Heavy explodes off of Pad 39A, February 2018. (SpaceX)
-
- Falcon Heavy’s side boosters seconds away from near-simultaneous landings at Landing Zones 1 and 2. (SpaceX)
-
- SpaceX technicians wrench on Merlin 1D and Merlin Vacuum engines. Raptor was apparently dramatically larger in person. (SpaceX)
-
- It’s currently unclear whether B1046 or B1048 will become the first SpaceX rocket to fly three times. (Tom Cross)
-
- Falcon 9 B1048 stands proud after its West Coast launch debut, August 2nd. (Pauline Acalin)
On the other hand, several recent delays of SpaceX’s imminent (-ish) launch of Argentinian Earth observation satellite SAOCOM-1A have been suggested by several employees of the country’s CONAE space agency to be rocket-related, as they understand that the satellite itself is effectively ready to head to orbit at any time. It has yet to be officially confirmed, but it’s understood that Falcon 9 B1048 – previously flown on the launch of Iridium-7 – is being refurbished for SAOCOM-1A, potentially contributing to launch delays as SpaceX cautiously works through the inaugural reuses of some of its very first serial Falcon 9 Block 5 boosters.
Time will soon tell, as launching the roughly 8 to 10 launches tentatively remaining on SpaceX’s 2018 manifest will require extensive reuse of Block 5 boosters if multiple slips into 2019 are to be prevented. Regardless, best of luck to SpaceX’s technicians and engineers as they beat back rocket demons, grapple with uncooperative satellite payloads, and navigate the winding paths of Department of Defense and NASA rocket launch certifications.
For prompt updates, on-the-ground perspectives, and unique glimpses of SpaceX’s rocket recovery fleet check out our brand new LaunchPad and LandingZone newsletters!
Florida Governor Ron DeSantis has sharply criticized legacy media outlets for what he describes as selective and biased reporting on vehicle accidents involving Tesla. In a recent X post, DeSantis questioned why headlines routinely spotlight the Tesla brand in crash stories, even when human error is the clear cause, while similar incidents with other automakers often receive generic treatment.
A prime example is the June 19, 2026, fatal crash in Katy, Texas. A Tesla Model 3 driven by Michael Butler struck a brick home at high speed, killing 76-year-old Martha Avila inside. Initial reports and headlines prominently featured “Tesla crash” and referenced the driver’s claim that an automated driving-assistance system was engaged.
Many outlets quickly speculated that Full Self-Driving or Autopilot were the cause of the crash, immediately blaming the suites for the accident shortly after it happened.
However, Tesla responded shortly after the accident with vehicle data that showed Butler manually overrode the system by pressing the accelerator to 100 percent, reaching 73 MPH in a residential area, more than double the speed limit. The accelerator remained floored after impact.
Tesla finally clarifies fatal Texas crash, confirms driver manually overrode acceleration
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) later confirmed these findings, and Butler now faces manslaughter charges. His phone searches also included queries like “Tesla FSD too timid,” suggesting he may have intervened aggressively. Despite this, many headlines continued to center Tesla’s technology rather than the driver’s actions.
DeSantis highlighted a Washington Post headline, which was labeled, “Newly released photo shows wreckage of Tesla crash that killed grandmother.”
Do legacy media outlets typically use headlines involving the make of a car in a crash or is that only for Tesla?
It would be one thing if the self-driving malfunctioned but the crash was purely human-induced.
Seems like these outlets want to associate Tesla with crashes as… pic.twitter.com/EmfyeYiuv6
— Ron DeSantis (@RonDeSantis) July 17, 2026
The subheadline noted the driver overrode assistance and floored the accelerator, yet the brand name dominated the framing. He asked whether legacy outlets typically name the make of a car in routine crashes or reserve that treatment for Tesla to push a narrative.
This pattern appears widespread. Crashes involving Ford, Chevrolet, or Toyota vehicles frequently appear as “pickup truck slams into home” or “fatal car crash kills pedestrian” without brand specifics, especially absent new technology angles.
High-profile Ford F-150 or Chevy Silverado incidents tied to large sales volumes often escape brand-callout scrutiny. In contrast, Tesla stories consistently lead with the manufacturer, amplifying perceptions of risk despite data showing strong overall safety performance:
🚨 Why do Tesla Owners get so defensive over the narrative of crashes involving Teslas? https://t.co/aX7ogtjTCR pic.twitter.com/KO4QWaLOKl
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 24, 2026
Tesla’s own 2025 Impact Report indicates vehicles using FSD logged 0.19 major incidents per million miles, roughly eight times fewer than the U.S. average. Models like the Model Y also rank among the safest in IIHS and NHTSA testing for occupant protection. Critics argue disproportionate coverage ignores these statistics and driver behavior factors, such as younger or more aggressive Tesla owners in some studies.
DeSantis frames this as part of a broader political agenda against innovative American companies like Tesla. By consistently naming Tesla while downplaying others, media outlets risk eroding public trust and shaping perceptions detached from the evidence of human error in most cases.
As autonomous technology evolves across the industry, consistent and factual reporting will be essential to separate real safety concerns from narrative-driven coverage.
Tesla entered two new markets this week by advancing its presence in Latvia (Europe) and officially launching operations in Uruguay (South America), marking a rapid dual-continent expansion.
These moves underscore the company’s strategy to tap into emerging EV markets with supportive policies, renewable energy grids, and growing demand for sustainable transport.
Latvia: Strengthening the Baltic Footprint
In Latvia, Tesla has built on its earlier registration of Tesla Latvia SIA in late 2025 with recent steps toward full operations, including job postings for a service center and representation in Riga. This aligns with broader Baltic expansion following Lithuania’s model of pop-up stores and service centers.
Coming to Latvia https://t.co/XNkQQJ2O6a pic.twitter.com/yS9kpcNky1
— Tesla Europe, Middle East & Africa (@teslaeurope) July 17, 2026
EV penetration in Latvia stands at around 7 percent for BEVs in new passenger car registrations. 2025 data showed 1,602 BEVs out of about 22,500 total, or 7.1 percent, with combined plug-ins nearing 19 percent. Growth has been steady but below the European average, supported by government subsidies and infrastructure development. Tesla models like the Model 3 lead local EV registrations.
Vehicles for the Latvian market will likely be sourced from Gigafactory Berlin or Gigafactory Shanghai. Charging infrastructure is robust for the region as well, with over 400- 2,000 public points, with Tesla Superchargers in Riga, Jūrmala, and along Via Baltica routes offering up to 250 kW.
Uruguay: Third South American Country
Tesla teased its Uruguay arrival with “Estamos llegando,” or, “We are arriving,” on social media, followed by an official presentation scheduled for mid-July.
Hola Uruguay 🇺🇾
Nuestros Model 3 y Model Y están cada vez mas cerca! pic.twitter.com/FR41fsA7um
— Tesla Latinoamérica (@Tesla_LatAm) June 30, 2026
The company established Tesla Uruguay SAS, homologated Model 3 and Model Y (three versions each), and appointed local leadership. This makes Uruguay Tesla’s third official South American market after Chile and Colombia.
Uruguay boasts one of Latin America’s highest EV penetrations, with battery-electric vehicles exceeding 20 percent market share recently, driven by tax incentives, high fuel prices, and a nearly 95-100 percent renewable electricity grid. Hundreds of Teslas already operate via grey imports, but official sales bring warranties, service, and support.
Vehicles will be imported from Gigafactory Shanghai, enabling competitive pricing for Model 3 and Model Y. Charging plans include Supercharger development alongside existing infrastructure, leveraging the country’s green energy advantage for affordable operation.
Tesla Superchargers follow Model 3 and Model Y to South American country
Tesla’s Dual Continent Expansion
Tesla’s simultaneous push into Latvia and Uruguay demonstrates efficient scaling: prioritizing service and infrastructure first, then direct sales in high-potential niches. In Europe, it fills Baltic gaps; in Latin America, it counters Chinese dominance while leveraging renewables.
This dual move signals Tesla’s ambition to accelerate global EV adoption amid varying regional paces. By addressing local needs, like subsidies in Latvia or incentives and green grids in Uruguay, Tesla not only boosts volumes but advances its mission of sustainable energy.
For investors and consumers, it highlights resilience and opportunity in diverse markets, potentially paving the way for further growth in underserved regions. With strong fundamentals in both, these entries could yield long-term gains as EV transitions mature worldwide.
SpaceX has announced a new target date for the thirteenth test flight of Starship: Monday, July 20, with the launch window opening at 6:45 p.m ET/5:45 p.m. CT.
This is the first rescheduling attempt of Starship’s 13th test flight. It was set to launch last night, but SpaceX scrubbed the launch attempt.
🚨 SpaceX is now looking at Monday, July 20th at 6:45 p.m ET/5:45 p.m. CT for the 13th test flight of Starship pic.twitter.com/7s8aMJV5Ge
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 17, 2026
CEO Elon Musk revealed that some of the engines on Starship did not start, which automatically triggers a launch abort. Two of the Raptor engines will be removed and replaced.
To be confident of a good flight, 2 Raptors will be removed & replaced. Most probable launch timing is early next week.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 17, 2026
SpaceX officially announced the new launch window this morning.
Starship’s 13th test launch comes with a few new objectives, but SpaceX does not plan to attempt a catch of the booster, which it has done several times in the past.
For Starship’s Upper Stage, there are some adjustments to ensure engine reusability that will be assessed during the ascent, and 20 operational Starlink V3 satellites are also set to make their way into space. SpaceX also plans to attempt an in-space relight of a single Raptor engine, which is a critical demonstration for future orbital deorbit, refueling, and deep space maneuvers.
Ultimately, it will splash down in the Indian Ocean.
The continuous tests help SpaceX advance the Starship program toward eventual full reusability, operational Starlink V3 deployment, and future missions, which include NASA’s Artemis program.
Ron DeSantis calls out media bias in Tesla crash coverage
Tesla enters two new markets on two different continents in one week
