News
SpaceX Starlink Gen2 mission marks Falcon 9 rocket’s 200th successful launch
A day and a half after its 200th launch overall, SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket has successfully launched for the 200th time.
Falcon 9 has only suffered two mission-related failures in flight: one partial failure in 2012 and a catastrophic failure in 2015. Falcon 9’s 2015 failure entirely destroyed the rocket and its cargo-carrying Dragon spacecraft before they reached orbit. Its 2012 failure only doomed a secondary Orbcomm satellite payload, while the primary mission – a Cargo Dragon supply delivery for NASA – was technically successful.
Excluding partial failures, Starlink 5-3 was SpaceX’s 200th successful Falcon 9 launch since the rocket debuted in June 2010. Indicative of the company’s aggressive launch cadence as of late, Falcon 9 completed its 200th launch overall (199th success) less than two days prior, on January 31st.
The update that's rolling out to the fleet makes full use of the front and rear steering travel to minimize turning circle. In this case a reduction of 1.6 feet just over the air— Wes (@wmorrill3) April 16, 2024
Starlink 5-3 was SpaceX’s third launch for its Starlink Gen2 constellation, though the mission carried 53 ordinary Starlink V1.5 satellites. Oddly, the Starlink 5-2 mission carried 56 Starlink V1.5 satellites and set a new record for the heaviest SpaceX and Falcon 9 payload on January 26th. Just a few weeks prior, Falcon 9’s Starlink 5-1 launch carried 54 satellites – a curious amount of variability for three missions launching the same type of satellite to similar orbits.
As previously discussed on Teslarati, perhaps the single most important upgrade meant for SpaceX’s Starlink Gen2 constellation was a move to larger V2.0 satellites with almost a magnitude more usable bandwidth. But full-size Starlink V2.0 satellites can only be efficiently launched on SpaceX’s next-generation Starship rocket, which is likely at least 6-12 months away from its first satellite launch. SpaceX also told the FCC that it was building a mid-sized Starlink V2.0 satellite that could be launched on its existing Falcon rockets, but those compromised satellites have yet to appear.
Instead, SpaceX is launching Starlink V1.5 satellites under its Gen2 constellation license, which currently allows the company to launch and operate 7,500 of the almost 30,000 satellites it requested permission for. SpaceX’s Starlink Gen1 constellation is still ~1100 satellites away from completion. One possible explanation is that nearly all of the missing Gen1 satellites are headed to polar or semi-polar Earth orbits. Those polar satellites will spend far more time over regions of Earth with few to no Starlink customers, making them less capital-efficient than their mid-latitude siblings.
In other words, polar Starlink satellites – while necessary to ensure truly global coverage – effectively add less capacity to SpaceX’s network than they would if launched to midlatitude orbits. That appears to be exactly what SpaceX is currently doing with Starlink Gen2. The mid-latitude ‘shells’ of its Gen1 constellation are close to full, so the company is launching Starlink V1.5 satellites under its Gen2 license to increase the capacity of the overall network as quickly as possible.
Eventually, SpaceX will almost certainly replace those smaller, less capable V1.5 satellites with V2.0 satellites. In the near term, though, SpaceX has concluded that an inefficient gap-filler is better than waiting for a more optimal solution. It should not take long for the impact of Gen2 launches to be felt. Once the 163 ‘Gen2’ satellites launched in the last five weeks reach operational orbits, they will increase Starlink’s mid-latitude capacity by more than 5%.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 November, Bloomberg 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.
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
Tesla China January wholesale sales rise 9% year-on-year
Tesla’s Apple CarPlay ambitions are not dead, they’re still in the works
