News
SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket shown off in unprecedented detail ahead of next US Air Force launch
The United States Air Force (USAF) has published a number of spectacular photos shared by SpaceX, revealing some unprecedentedly detailed views of a Falcon 9 rocket in various stages of manufacturing.
Likely taken in and around SpaceX’s massive Hawthorne, California rocket factory and headquarters and McGregor, Texas test facilities in recent weeks, these new photos show the work being done behind the scenes to prepare a brand new Falcon 9 rocket for SpaceX’s next US Air Force launch. Over the last few years, the extremely competitive Falcon 9 rocket has secured SpaceX up to five launch contracts for the USAF’s next-generation GPS III satellite constellation.
Made up of three explicit contracts and two contract options to be exercised (or discarded) later on, SpaceX completed the first of those contracts in December 2018, successfully launching GPS III SV01 – the first of 32 planned satellites. As evidenced by the name, GPS III is the latest iteration of US Global Positioning System satellites and should offer better security, a greater resistance to jamming and interference, and improved navigational accuracy. Unfortunately, it could be several years to half a decade or more before civilian users begin to see the benefits from GPS III, but chances are good that SpaceX will come to launch a vast majority of the upgraded satellites.
According to the post that accompanied the photos published by the Space and Missile Systems Center (SMC), SpaceX’s second USAF GPS III mission – this time carrying Space Vehicle 03 (SV03) – is scheduled to launch no earlier than (NET) the end of Q1 2020. Preparations are reportedly well underway for the critical launch: SMC says that SpaceX has already delivered the mission’s new Falcon 9 Block 5 booster from its Hawthorne factory to McGregor, Texas, where technicians are now preparing the reusable rocket for a routine static fire test before shipping it east to Florida.
Additionally, the GPS III SV03 mission’s Falcon 9 payload fairing is apparently already at SpaceX’s Cape Canaveral Air Force Station facilities, likely waiting for Air Force to ship the large satellite to Florida. If identical to SpaceX’s first GPS III launch, the GPS III SV03 spacecraft will weigh approximately 3800 kg (8400 lb) and will be launched to an elliptical orbit measuring some 1000 km by 20,200 km (620 mi x 12,500 mi).
Astute observers will notice that both the GPS III satellite mass and the orbit it’s heading to are significantly lower than an array of prior missions that have launched heavier satellites much higher and still recovered the Falcon 9 booster along the way. SpaceX’s first GPS III launch was particularly exceptional because it marked the first and only time that a new Falcon 9 Block 5 rocket was intentionally expended without any attempt to land the booster.
In fact, Falcon 9 booster B1054 didn’t even have a semblance of landing legs or grid fins installed, a testament to the certainty of its premature demise. Thankfully, whatever the dubiously technical reasons that led to B1054’s demise, it appears that SpaceX may actually be allowed to recover the Falcon 9 booster (likely B1060 or B1061) assigned to launch GPS III SV03. Although nothing has actually been said along those lines, the Falcon 9 booster pictured in the middle photo below – implied to be the Air Force’s next GPS launch vehicle – clearly has some of the basic hardware needed for landing legs.
As such, there is at least a small excuse to preserve hope that SpaceX’s next Falcon 9 GPS III launch will feature a booster landing, thus preventing a premature and extremely wasteful demise after just a single launch. Even if the US Air Force never actually qualifies flight-proven commercial rockets to launch its payloads, the recovered booster should be able to support anywhere from several to 90+ additional launches before SpaceX actually needs to retire or expend the booster.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
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
