Connect with us

News

SpaceX closes in on Falcon 9 reliability milestone after flawless Monday launch [photos]

Falcon 9 B1056 lifts off on its third orbital launch in seven months, carrying a communications satellite to geostationary transfer orbit. (Richard Angle)

Published

on

SpaceX’s workhorse Falcon 9 rocket has completed its thirteenth launch of 2019, leaving the vehicle just one mission away from a major reliability milestone.

At 7:10 pm ET, December 16th (00:10 UTC, Dec 17), Falcon 9 booster B1056, a new upper stage, and the nearly 7-metric ton (15,500 lb) Kacific-1/JCSAT-18 communications satellite lifted off from SpaceX’s Cape Canaveral LC-40 launch pad. As has more or less become the norm, Falcon 9 sailed through prelaunch preparations, payload integration, and launch with zero notable issues and lifted off at the precise start of a ~90-minute window.

Around nine minutes after launch and 30 seconds after the second stage reached orbit, Falcon 9 B1056 successfully landed aboard drone ship Of Course I Still Love You (OCISLY), completing the booster’s third launch and landing in seven months. 27 minutes after launch, Falcon 9’s second stage reignited and burned for more than 50 seconds, raising one end of its orbit by more than 20,000 km (12,500 mi). Five minutes later, Falcon 9 officially completed its mission by gently releasing Kacific-1/JCSAT-18 from the second stage, where the satellite shortly reoriented itself, deployed ~40-meter (~125 ft) long solar ‘wings’, and began verifying its systems’ health.

In what can only be described as an event of astronomical odds, a firefly photobombed Richard Angle’s Kacific-1 long exposure, perfectly crossing the streak of Falcon 9 booster B1056’s reentry burn several hundred miles downrange. (Richard Angle)

Aside from another successful and issue-free launch under the Falcon family’s belt, the Kacific-1 mission is significant for another major reason: it’s Falcon 9’s 49th consecutively-successful launch since January 2017. Falcon 9’s last catastrophic failure occurred on September 1st, 2016 when the rocket’s upper stage violently exploded, destroying the rest of the rocket and its Amos-6 satellite payload.

SpaceX took approximately four months to determine the root cause of that failure and modify hardware and procedures accordingly before returning to flight with the first Iridium NEXT launch on January 14th, 2017. In the three years (35 months) since then, Falcon 9 has successfully launched a total of 49 times in a row without even a partial failure. After one additional launch success, Falcon 9 will have flown 50 consecutively-successful missions, a symbolic but still exceptional sign of the rocket’s excellent reliability. That 50th launch attempt could come as early as December 30th in the form of SpaceX’s third 60-satellite Starlink mission, known as Starlink-2.

Advertisement
Falcon 9 B1056’s third successful launch and landing also brought the launch vehicle family just one mission away from a major reliability milestone. (Richard Angle)

Technically speaking, if Falcon Heavy is included, SpaceX has already completed 52 consecutively-successful orbital launches without a single failure (or partial failure), the only company or space agency in the world that can currently claim that feat. Although both Arianespace and ULA are infamous for whitewashing the partial failures of their launch vehicles, Ariane 5 unfortunately suffered a partial failure in January 2018, while ULA’s Atlas V and Delta IV suffered their own partial failures in 2007 and 2004, respectively. Atlas V experienced another in-flight anomaly in 2016, although it was not technically classified as a partial failure.

This means that Ariane 5, Delta IV, and Atlas V – still some of the most reliable launch vehicles ever built – have technically only performed 9, 36, and 70 (or 18) consecutively-successful launches since their most recent partial failure (or in-flight anomaly). In other words, if measured in terms of uninterrupted consecutive launch successes, SpaceX’s Falcon 9 is either the most reliable or the second most reliable launch vehicle currently in operation.

Falcon 9 B1056 stands vertical for the third time in seven months at SpaceX’s LC-40 launch pad. (Richard Angle)

Perhaps even more impressive is the fact that SpaceX has pulled off that feat of reliability in less than three years, unequivocally making Falcon 9 the best all-purpose launch vehicle in the world in terms of its combined reliability and flight frequency – the latter thanks in large part to the rocket’s exceptionally competitive pricing.

As of now, SpaceX has at least two or three-dozen launches nominally planned for 2020 and if all of those launches are successfully completed, Falcon 9 will almost certainly become the world’s most reliable operational launch vehicle by any measure.

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

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.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla China

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. 

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

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.

Published

on

Credit: Michał Gapiński/YouTube

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 NovemberBloomberg 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.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla brings closure to Model Y moniker with launch of new trim level

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

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

Continue Reading