SpaceX
SpaceX hangar packed with Falcon Heavy Block 5 boosters for early April debut
For a company that rarely reveals anything without explicit intent, a February 28th video posted by SpaceX during the lead-up to Crew Dragon’s launch debut featured a surprise cameo: two Block 5 side boosters meant to support Falcon Heavy’s commercial debut and second launch ever.
Likely a subtle nod to close observers and fans, the inclusion of Falcon Heavy is a perfect bit of foreshadowing for the next launch set to occur from Pad 39A after Crew Dragon’s flawless orbital debut. As of now, Falcon Heavy Flight 2 is settling in on a potential launch as early as the first week of April, although delays during the rocket’s critical preflight processing and static fire test are about as likely as they were during the vehicle’s inaugural mission. If the rocket’s first launch and booster recoveries are fully successful, both side boosters (and perhaps the center core) could fly for a second time as few as two months later in June 2019.
A number of photos taken by Instagram users visiting Kennedy Space Center appear to indicate that SpaceX has more or less completed the reconfiguration of Pad 39A’s transporter/erector (T/E), modifying the base with additional hold-down clamps to account for three Falcon boosters instead of the usual one. Ten days after the successful launch of Falcon 9 B1051 in support of Crew Dragon’s first mission to orbit, it’s likely that additional work remains to ensure that 39A is fully refurbished and reconfigured for Falcon Heavy.
For the heavy-lift rocket’s commercial debut and second flight ever, SpaceX is likely to be exceptionally cautious and methodical in their preflight preparations. This is especially necessary due to the fact that Falcon Heavy Flight 2 differs dramatically from Falcon Heavy’s demo configuration, degrading the applicability of some aspects of the data gathered during the rocket’s largely successful test flight.
Most notably, all three first stage boosters will be Block 5 variants on their first flights, whereas Flight 1’s first stage featured two flight-proven Block 2 boosters (B1023 and B1025) and one new Block 3 booster (B1033). Additionally, the center core – B1033 – was lost during a landing anomaly that prevented the booster from reigniting its engine for a landing burn, cutting off another valuable source of data that would have served to better inform engineers on the performance of Falcon Heavy’s complex and previously unproven mechanical stage separation mechanisms.
Falcon 9 Block 5 is a fairly radical departure from the Block 2 and 3 variants SpaceX based Falcon Heavy’s initial design on. It’s possible that the rocket’s engineers were able to at least set up that design and manufacturing work on a safe path to forward compatibility, but it’s equally possible that so much work was focused on simply getting the vehicle past its launch debut that compatibility with Falcon 9 Block 4 and 5 was pushed well into the periphery. Considering the fact that it has now been more than a year since Falcon Heavy’s February 6th, 2018 debut, the latter eventuality offers a much better fit. Nevertheless, with a solid 13-14 additional months of redesign and testing complete, it seems that SpaceX is keen to get its super heavy-lift launch vehicle back on the horse, so to speak.
The specific changes made in Falcon 9 Block 4 is unclear aside from a general improvement in Merlin 1D and MVac performance, as well as significant upgrades to Falcon 9’s upper stage, likely focused on US military and NASA requirements for long-coast capabilities on unique mission profiles. Most significantly, Falcon 9 Block 5 transitioned the SpaceX rocket to a radically different primary thrust structure (also known as the octaweb), replacing welded assemblies with bolted assemblies wherever possible. This simultaneously allows for easier repairs and modifications, improves ease of manufacture, and increases the structure’s overall strength, a critical benefit for Falcon Heavy’s heavily-stressed center core. Meanwhile, Falcon 9 Block 5 moved from Full Thrust’s (Block 3/4) maximum 6800 kN (1,530,000 lbf) of thrust to more than 7600 kN (1,710,000 lbf), an increase of roughly 12%. Combined with Block 5’s focus on extreme reusability, SpaceX engineers and technicians likely had to do a huge amount of work to leap from Falcon Heavy Flight 1 to Flight 2.
Aside from the presence of both Falcon Heavy side boosters, both of which were spotted arriving in Florida by local observers, the first Block 5 Falcon Heavy center core also very likely arrived within the last few months, followed rapidly by can be assumed to be the mission’s fairing and Falcon upper stage. Falcon Heavy’s commercial debut will see the rocket attempt to place communications satellite Arabsat 6A – weighing around 6000 kg (13,200 lb) – into a high-energy geostationary orbit, either direct-to-GEO or a transfer (GTO) variety.
If all goes according to plan, SpaceX will attempt to turn around Falcon Heavy’s Block 5 side boosters (B1052 and B1053) for Falcon Heavy’s third launch – the USAF’s STP-2 mission – as few as 60-80 days later, June 2019. According to NASASpaceflight, STP-2 will fly with a new center core (presumed to be B1057) instead of reusing Arabsat 6A’s well-cooked B1055 booster.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
Investor's Corner
Tesla opens the Q&A for its biggest earnings call yet
Tesla opens its Q3 earnings Q&A, and Cybercab, Robotaxi, Optimus and regulators loom over October 21.
Tesla has opened its shareholder question portal for the Q3 2026 earnings call, with the Say Q&A page already listing questions. Investors have until 4:00 p.m. EDT on October 20 to submit and vote on what management should answer.
The call is set for Wednesday, October 21. Tesla will post results after the market closes, with a live webcast at 4:30 p.m. CT, or 5:30 p.m. ET, through its investor relations site.
Say ranks questions by the number of shares behind the votes, which gives institutional holders extra weight over the retail crowd.
Ahead of Q2, retail investors asked why Robotaxi growth had stalled, when Cybercab would start customer rides, and where the Optimus Gen 3 ramp stood, while an institutional holder asked how Tesla and SpaceX would split Terafab duties. Cybercab has since answered one of those. Tesla said last week it has 300 plus Cybercabs serving Austin, up eightfold in 30 days, with Dallas named as the next city. The questions now are likely to move from when to how fast.
There is also a regulatory question hanging over the call. NHTSA has demanded sworn answers on how the pedal free Cybercab was certified against federal safety standards, with responses due October 30, nine days after the call. Whether an analyst raises it live is unknown, but it is the kind of exposure that tends to find its way into a Q&A.
The numbers will not be the main draw. Tesla already reported 486,532 deliveries and 13.7 GWh of storage for the quarter. Consensus sits around 43 to 45 cents per share on roughly $27.8 billion in revenue, according to Zacks, after a Q2 report that missed on EPS. Goldman Sachs, which holds a Neutral rating and a $360 target, argues the outlook for Robotaxi, FSD and Optimus will matter more to the stock than the quarter itself.
The call also lands six days after the rescheduled Roadster event, which Tesla will stream on X on Thursday, October 15, at 7:55 p.m. CT. If the Roadster shows up with a production date or a SpaceX thruster package, expect it to climb the voting list before the deadline.
Elon Musk
Ukraine says Starlink is cutting out its military drones as Poland calls out Elon Musk
Ukrainian officials allege SpaceX limited military Starlink speeds, disrupting drone missions; SpaceX has not commented.
Ukrainian officials are accusing SpaceX of placing a speed limit on the military version of Starlink that their forces use to fly drones, but SpaceX has not confirmed that any change was made. Presidential adviser Serhiy Beskrestnov said in a Telegram post on Wednesday that Starshield terminals have begun losing service when they move faster than about 100 miles per hour, according to a Reuters report. “Our defense forces did not receive a warning about this limitation, and this led to the disruption of several missions,” he wrote.
Ukraine’s 7th Rapid Reaction Corps told Reuters that connections dropped for 10 to 20 seconds at just 68 to 75 mph, which made the drones harder to control. Volunteer Serhiy Sternenko, citing military reports, said the dropouts are now starting at 37 to 43 mph. These accounts come from Ukrainian officials and military sources and have not been independently verified. Regular civilian terminals were reportedly not affected, according to EUalive.
.@POTUS: We told Zelensky, ‘You can do whatever you want to Russia, but don’t hit the refineries because that’s a world problem.’ And what does he do? He goes and hits the diesel fuel. He better damn well stop. https://t.co/CdRlMcPlKr
— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) October 10, 2026
SpaceX has not publicly commented or explained what, if anything, changed. Beskrestnov and other Ukrainian officials believe the issue is intentional and point to the timing. Washington has been pressing Kyiv to stop long range strikes on Russian oil refineries after President Trump called for an “energy ceasefire,” and Musk posted on Saturday that “Zelensky has gone too far.” EUalive noted that neither Ukrainian nor Polish officials have presented evidence that the limit was ordered by Washington or by SpaceX, so the link to politics remains an allegation. Other explanations, such as a technical or policy change affecting fast moving terminals, have not been ruled out.
Poland’s foreign minister, Radosław Sikorski, responded on X by quote tweeting a Kyiv Independent report and writing: “Hey, @elonmusk, big man, are you playing politics with your products again? As your European customers, we are watching you.” Poland is the largest funder of Ukraine’s Starlink service, having supplied more than 29,000 terminals and covering operating costs Sikorski has put at roughly $50 million a year. The wording echoes their 2025 clash, when Musk told Sikorski to “be quiet, small man.” At the time of writing, neither Musk nor SpaceX had responded to the claims.
Hey, @elonmusk, big man, are you playing politics with your products again?
As your European customers, we are watching you.— Radosław Sikorski 🇵🇱🇪🇺 (@sikorskiradek) October 14, 2026
The dispute sits on top of a long history. Musk confirmed in February 2022 that Starlink was active in Ukraine after a request from a Ukrainian minister. That October, SpaceX asked the Pentagon to share the bill and Musk said the cost was approaching $20 million a month, before he reversed course and said SpaceX would keep paying. In December 2024 the Pentagon moved some of those terminals onto the Starshield service, the government version now at the center of the complaints.
SpaceX has also changed how its network treats certain terminals in Ukraine before, and that time it was with Kyiv’s cooperation. In February, Ukrainian officials confirmed that terminals believed to be used by Russian troops were disabled after coordination with SpaceX, a step that Ukrainian commanders later said hurt Russian assaults. Whether anything similar is behind the latest reports is unclear, which is why Kyiv is asking for answers.
Ukraine is already looking at backups. Defense tech company Stetman is developing its own satellite system, UASAT-NANO, and officials in Europe have discussed alternatives to Starlink since early 2025, though none match its scale yet.
Elon Musk
FAA kicks off review of SpaceX’s bid to fly Starship nearly every day
FAA is reviewing SpaceX’s plan for 456 Starship launches a year, up from 25 today.
The FAA said Tuesday that it will prepare an environmental impact statement on SpaceX’s proposal to run as many as 456 Starship launches and 912 landings a year from Starbase, Texas. SpaceX is currently authorized for 25 launches and 50 landings annually, which makes the request roughly 18 times the existing ceiling. The notice of intent is set to publish in the Federal Register on Wednesday.
The plan comes in two phases. Phase 1 would allow up to 100 launches and 200 landings a year, on any day and at any hour. Phase 2, which the FAA says could arrive within several years, would raise the limit to the full 456 launches, still at any hour but only on weekdays. The agency noted that 912 landings is the upper limit for the Texas facility no matter where a given mission begins, and that Starship and Super Heavy could come down at the launch site or in the Gulf and open ocean.
A draft statement will be released for public comment at a later date, and the FAA has not said when. According to the Federal Registar, written comments are due November 30 on regulations.gov under docket FAA-2026-12808, with in person scoping meetings on November 17 in Brownsville and November 19 in Port Isabel, plus a virtual session on November 18. The review will weigh air quality, wildlife, coastal resources, water, noise, and aviation, and the FAA said any increase beyond this proposal would need its own separate review.
The numbers look large next to what Starbase has actually done. Starship has flown three times from Texas this year, including Flight 14 on September 28, the first orbital flight, which deployed 26 Starlink V3 satellites. Bloomberg reported that Starbase has never launched more than five times in a calendar year. The current cap of 25 comes from an FAA approval in May 2025. In February, the agency also approved up to 44 Starship launches a year from Launch Complex 39A in Florida, so Phase 1 in Texas alone would more than double that allowance.
Musk has said Starship could eventually fly more than once per hour within less than a decade, per Bloomberg. The nearer term target is Flight 15. Musk said on October 10 that it is hopefully four to six weeks away and will try to catch the ship with the tower, as Teslarati covered. That flight still runs under the existing 25 launch limit, and so would every Starbase launch for as long as the new review takes.
As of mid morning Pacific time on Tuesday, SpaceX had not posted about the filing on its own account.
Tesla opens the Q&A for its biggest earnings call yet
Ukraine says Starlink is cutting out its military drones as Poland calls out Elon Musk
FAA kicks off review of SpaceX’s bid to fly Starship nearly every day
The Pentagon taps Elon Musk to design the battlefield of the future
SpaceX reveals how its 1 Million AI satellite network will work and prevent space collisions
