News
SpaceX sets Dragon reuse record, debuts drone ship on first launch in two months
Update #2: After a 24-hour weather delay, conditions were far more favorable on August 29th, allowing a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket to lift off for the first time in almost two months and send a cargo-filled Dragon spacecraft on its way to the International Space Station (ISS).
Aside from marking the end of SpaceX’s longest launch hiatus in two years, CRS-23’s successful liftoff also means that the company has smashed the world record for fastest orbital space capsule reuse. As part of Cargo Dragon 2’s first reuse ever, SpaceX launched Dragon C208 just seven and a half months (227d) after its first orbital reentry and splashdown, handily beating the previous record of 328 days. Additionally, flying for the fourth time, Falcon 9 booster B1064 became the first rocket to land on brand new SpaceX drone ship A Shortfall of Gravitas (ASOG) after sending Dragon C208 on its way to the ISS.
Getting a nice view of CRS-23's trunk as it separates, confirming no trunk cargo on this flight. pic.twitter.com/ZeJjviKqFE— Jonathan McDowell (@planet4589) August 29, 2021
Update: Although the weather forecast has worsened, SpaceX remains on track to attempt its first launch in eight weeks – a mission that will also smash one of the company’s orbital spacecraft reusability records.
While mostly mundane, a system preceding Tropical Storm Ida is producing conditions less than optimal for rocket launches, raising the risk of in-flight lightning strikes and the chances of Falcon 9 and Dragon flying through clouds containing precipitation (rain/ice/etc). Ultimately, that means that there’s just a 40% chance (down from 50% in the last few days) that weather conditions will be favorable for SpaceX to launch CRS-23. Regardless, barring a surprise announcement in the next few hours, it appears that there’s enough of a chance that SpaceX and NASA will still make an attempt.
If all goes according to plan, a flight-proven Falcon 9 rocket will send an upgraded Cargo Dragon on the way to orbit for the second time in seven months – almost twice as fast a turnaround as SpaceX’s ~340-day record for orbital spacecraft reuse. Tune in below around 3:20am EDT (07:20 UTC) to catch the hopeful launch live.
For the first time in more than nine weeks, SpaceX has completed a routine Falcon 9 preflight test known as a static fire and verified that the rocket is ready to launch later this week.
Save for at least one booster qualification test completed at SpaceX’s McGregor, Texas development facilities, Falcon 9’s August 25th static fire is the first since June 22nd. The upgraded Cargo Dragon space station resupply mission the rocket will support will also be SpaceX’s first launch since June 30th – the company’s longest hiatus between launches since a three-month pause that began two years ago.
Now, just a few days before that drought is expected to end, a SpaceX executive has partially explained why the company hasn’t launched a single Falcon rocket in ~60 days after completing a record 20 orbital launches in the first half of 2021.
Speaking at the 2021 Space Symposium on August 24th, SpaceX President and COO Gwynne Shotwell revealed that the company had chosen to pause Starlink missions (representing the vast majority of its 2021 launches) and focus on preparing a new generation of satellites for flight. Believed to be called Starlink V1.5, those new satellites represent a relatively small design change save for one crucial addition: multiple lasers.
All the way back in mid-2018, SpaceX launched its very first pair of Starlink prototype satellites – spacecraft that largely functioned as expected and provided a wealth of data but were almost nothing like the Starlink V0.9 and V1.0 spacecraft SpaceX would eventually start launching in 2019. Nevertheless, they did carry sets of small lasers generally known as optical intersatellite links or OISLs for short. Not radically dissimilar to the hundreds of thousands of miles of fiber optic cables that make up the backbone of the internet, lasers operating in the vacuum of space can effectively mirror the extraordinary bandwidth and performance offered by fiber connections – but wirelessly.
Instead of carefully insulated cables filled with tiny threads of glass, which really just serve as a controlled environment for light-based communications, OISLs enable a similar feat by replacing cables with extraordinarily precise mechanisms capable of aiming lasers with sub-millimeter precision from dozens or hundreds of miles away. As a result, laser interlinks are fairly complex and expensive devices – not something currently economical to install on thousands of satellites mainly focused on affordability.
SpaceX, of course, has wanted to install unprecedentedly affordable laser interlinks on thousands of Starlink satellites for as long as the constellation has been publicly discussed. If realized, it would create an extraordinary orbital mesh network that would allow Starlink to self-route a large portion of user communications without the need for a colossal network of tens of thousands of ground stations covering every inch of Earth – land, sea, ice, and all. A Starlink constellation with near-universal laser interlinks could also potentially allow the constellation to not only match – but beat by a large margin – the latency of best-case terrestrial fiber-optic connections.
After effectively completing Starlink’s first ‘shell’ of satellites earlier this year, SpaceX shifted its focus to preparing for polar Starlink launches from both its west and east coast facilities. While the first shell lacked interlinks entirely, SpaceX appears to have decided that all polar Starlink satellites will be launched with its own custom-built space lasers, even if that means delaying Starlink launches until those lasers are ready for action. Due to the fact that the vast majority of SpaceX’s launches as of late have been its own Starlink missions, the company’s Falcon rockets simply haven’t had anything to launch.
That should change on August 28th, when a thrice-flown Falcon 9 booster launches a refurbished spacecraft on its second orbital space station resupply – a first for SpaceX’s upgraded Cargo Dragon 2 vehicle. A Shortfall of Gravitas (ASOG), SpaceX’s newest drone ship, will also be supporting its first Falcon landing ever as part of CRS-23, hopefully recovering Falcon 9 booster B1064 for a fifth launch later this year.
Tune in around 3:20am (07:20 UTC) on Saturday, August 28th to watch SpaceX’s first launch in two months live.
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.
The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.
Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:
“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”
The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:
“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”
Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
