News
SpaceX to launch ninth batch of Iridium NEXT satellites
Iridium Communications has chosen SpaceX to launch one last batch of its NEXT communications satellites, rounding out the constellation with up to five more on-orbit spares.
The company says that SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket will launch those satellites as part of a rideshare mission that is scheduled to lift off from California’s Vandenberg Space Force Base (VSFB) no earlier than mid-2023.
Iridium and SpaceX have had a close relationship for as long as Falcon 9 has been flying. In 2010, days after Falcon 9’s first successful launch, the company – led by CEO Matt Desch – awarded SpaceX a head-turning contract worth almost $500 million for the launch of the entire Iridium NEXT constellation. SpaceX kicked off Iridium NEXT launches in early 2017, returning to flight after a Falcon 9 rocket exploded on the launch pad just four months prior.
Less than two years later, SpaceX had completed eight Falcon 9 launches for Iridum and successfully deployed the full 75-satellite NEXT constellation (up from initial plans for 72 satellites) in polar orbit. Now, after what will be a four-and-a-half-year hiatus of joint activities, Iridium wants SpaceX to launch up to five of the six remaining NEXT spares, meaning that Falcon 9 will likely be responsible for launching all but one satellite of the constellation.
When SpaceX completed its eighth and (at the time) final Iridium launch in January 2019, the communications provider was left with nine NEXT satellite spares in orbit and six spares on the ground – all ready to take over (or be launched) in the event of an anomaly. Built by Thales Alenia Space, those satellites – built and launched for approximately $2.9 billion – have proven exceptionally reliable. Close to six years after the first launch, none of the 75 satellites currently in orbit have failed.
Iridium isn’t launching the six remaining ground spares because it needs them, in other words. On top of nixing the cost of storing satellites for years, Iridium’s CEO says that launching those spares now will “make [the NEXT] network even more resilient.” Prior to the September 8th announcement, Iridium’s Q2 2022 earnings report revealed a $35 million contract to launch five of the six remaining NEXT spares – almost certainly referring to its ninth SpaceX launch. Accounting for inflation, Iridium paid SpaceX approximately $8.9 million in 2022 dollars for each of the first 75 NEXT satellites it launched. For its ninth SpaceX launch, Iridium will pay $7 million – 21% less.
In 2020, Iridium signed a nonbinding agreement with startup Relativity Space to potentially launch all six spares on its 3D-printed Terran 1 rocket. Two years later, it appears that Iridium has mostly changed its mind, and no longer wants to worry about launching its NEXT spares “on an as-needed basis.” With a list price of $12 million, Terran 1 would only be able to launch one 860-kilogram (1900 lb) Iridium NEXT satellite at a time, translating to at least $72 million for all six. As is common for new launch vehicles, Terran 1 has also run into many delays, although Relativity says it could debut as soon as October 2022. It’s possible that Terran 1 could still launch the last Iridium NEXT ground spare, but statements published on Twitter by CEO Matt Desch do not inspire confidence.
Ultimately, Iridium seems to have elected to launch most or all of the remaining spares at once, simultaneously saving tens of millions of dollars and adding additional resiliency to its communications services.
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
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’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.”
🚨 Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli calls rumors of financial issues “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Read his full remarks here: https://t.co/t3Pg1NHvzy pic.twitter.com/LvHUPhO4Qf
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 15, 2026
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.
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
