Connect with us

News

SpaceX’s next two Falcon 9 launch dates set in late September

Published

on

SpaceX’s next Starlink launch has a firm date after stormy seas delayed its last attempt, placing the mission just two days before another crucial Falcon 9 launch and ~36 hours after ULA’s third scheduled NROL-44 launch attempt.

Launch photographer Ben Cooper and Spaceflight Now both confirm that SpaceX has rescheduled Starlink-12 to launch no earlier than (NET) 10:43 am EDT (UTC-4) on September 27th. Originally expected to launch on September 17th, a sequential pair of hurricanes forced SpaceX to delay the launch indefinitely until ocean conditions in the booster recovery zone improved.

While Starlink-12 floundered, the September 30th launch target for SpaceX’s third US military GPS III mission (SV04) has remained firmly in place for more than a month. Unexpectedly, satellite manufacturer Lockheed Martin revealed that SpaceX and the US military have actually moved the launch 24 hours forward. GPS III SV04 is now scheduled to lift off as early as 9:55 pm EDT (UTC-4) on September 29th, less than two days after Starlink.

For the third time, SpaceX is scheduled to fly a brand new Falcon 9 booster on a GPS III mission. According to US Launch Report’s Mike Wagner, Falcon 9 booster B1062 likely arrived in Cape Canaveral, Florida on September 11th, marking the official end of a month or two of acceptance testing – including a full static fire – at SpaceX’s McGregor, Texas facilities.

Flown on GPS III SV03 last June, Falcon 9 booster B1060 completed its McGregor static fire in February 2020. (SpaceX)
Falcon 9 B1061, sister to B1060 and B1062, arrived in Florida this July. B1062 is now believed to have arrived a bit less than two months later. (SpaceX)

Following in the footsteps of Falcon 9 B1060’s flawless June 30th GPS III SV03 launch, booster B1062 will attempt to land after sending GPS III SV04 on its way to orbit. If successful, it will be the second orbital-class booster to land after an operational US military launch, slowly but surely paving the way towards the military’s first operational launch on a flight-proven rocket.

Falcon 9 B1060 became the first booster to land after an operational US military launch on June 30th. The rocket launched a second time just two months later. (SpaceX)

Meanwhile, as previously discussed on Teslarati, SpaceX’s Starlink-12 launch was scrubbed on September 17th by bad sea conditions at and around drone ship Just Read The Instructions (JRTI).

“In drone ship JRTI’s defense, the Eastern seaboard is still feeling the remnants of Hurricane Sally at the same time as Hurricane Teddy is just a day or two away. Just ~48 hours from now, Starlink-12’s Falcon 9 booster landing zone will be subject to 30-40 mph (50-70 km/h) winds and peak wave heights of 15 feet (~4.5m) in the shadow of Teddy. The seas in that region will likely remain untenable for booster landings until September 24th or 25th at the earliest without major changes in current forecasts.”

Teslarati.com — September 18th, 2020

Advertisement

Unable to best fast ocean currents in the remnants of Hurricane Sally, SpaceX called off the launch and landing attempt as forecasts predicted even worse conditions – lead by Hurricane Teddy – to be just ~36 hours away. Ultimately, that proved to be a smart decision and NOAA’s Atlantic Ocean forecasting was fairly accurate. Calm seas and winds are now expected to arrive by the evening of September 24th and last at least several days.

Starlink-12 will be SpaceX’s 12th operational v1.0 satellite launch and 13th mission overall, potentially leaving the company just two missions away from kicking off the first public beta tests of Starlink internet. As of today, two more Starlink missions are already scheduled to launch in October.

Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.

Advertisement

Eric Ralph is Teslarati's senior spaceflight reporter and has been covering the industry in some capacity for almost half a decade, largely spurred in 2016 by a trip to Mexico to watch Elon Musk reveal SpaceX's plans for Mars in person. Aside from spreading interest and excitement about spaceflight far and wide, his primary goal is to cover humanity's ongoing efforts to expand beyond Earth to the Moon, Mars, and elsewhere.

Advertisement
Comments

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.

Published

on

By

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.

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

Lucid CEO dispels any rumors of bankruptcy: ‘So far from the facts’

Published

on

Credit: Lucid

Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.

The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.

The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.

Lucid denies rumors of bankruptcy after over 40% stock drop

Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”

Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”

Napoli said:

“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.

As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.

We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.

My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.

I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”

It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.

Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.

Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla responds to strange Supercharging pricing error with classy move

Published

on

(Credit: Tesla)

Tesla has once again demonstrated strong customer focus by swiftly addressing and fully refunding a bizarre Supercharger pricing glitch that affected drivers in Atlantic Canada.

The issue surfaced earlier this month when the Tesla app began displaying dramatically inflated per-minute charging rates at stations in Prince Edward Island and parts of New Brunswick.

One widely shared screenshot from a Charlottetown, PEI Supercharger showed rates reaching ridiculous levels: $6.00 per minute for the 180-250 kW tier, along with $3.57/min for 100-180 kW and $2.29/min for 60-100 kW.

These figures were several times higher than normal Supercharger pricing in the region.

To put the error in perspective, charging at the highest incorrect rate would have been shockingly expensive.

At 250 kW, a common charging speed at Superchargers, a vehicle pulls roughly 4.17 kWh per minute. Under the glitch, a driver spending just 10 minutes at peak power would face a $60 bill. A typical 20- to 30-minute session to add meaningful range could have cost $120 to $180 or more, before any congestion fees.

Tesla gets another layer of gamification with Free Supercharging on the line

By comparison, standard Canadian Supercharger rates usually fall between $0.25 and $0.60 per kWh, making a similar session cost roughly $15–$40. The erroneous per-minute structure, combined with the inflated numbers, turned what should be a convenient stop into a potential financial shock.

The glitch appears to have started sometime around early July, and quickly drew attention on social media as owners questioned whether Tesla had implemented steep hidden increases. Some drivers even reported seeing $0 charges in their history, indicating broader billing confusion.

Tesla’s official Charging account on X stated that correct pricing would roll out at midnight on July 13, so the fix is already in effect. More importantly, the company announced it would waive all fees for every Supercharger session since July 2. This blanket waiver covers the entire affected period without requiring users to file individual claims, with automated refunds expected soon. The decision affects stations in PEI and nearby areas in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.

It’s a classy move, and rather than issuing partial credits or forcing owners to submit support tickets, Tesla simply absorbed the cost of the system error and made drivers whole. In an industry where hidden fees and bill disputes are common, Tesla’s proactive, no-questions-asked approach reinforces owner trust and highlights the company’s commitment to service excellence.

The incident, while disruptive for a short time, ultimately showcases Tesla’s ability to own mistakes and prioritize customer satisfaction. Atlantic Canada Tesla owners can now charge with confidence again, knowing the company has their back when technology glitches occur.

In an era of complex EV billing, such transparency and generosity are refreshing and set a positive example for the industry.

Continue Reading