News
SpaceX’s first Falcon Heavy launch in two years is finally coming together
For the first time in more than two years, SpaceX’s next Falcon Heavy launch and dual-booster landing appears to be right around the corner – and it comes with a catch.
In February 2018, after years of anticipation, SpaceX successfully launched its triple-booster Falcon Heavy rocket for the first time in a spectacular show of force. Though the ‘center core’ booster got a little melty on its extremely high-speed reentry and was lost before it could attempt to land, the rocket’s twin side boosters performed an iconic near-simultaneous landing just a handful of miles away from where they lifted off.
Then Falcon Heavy took a good, long break. Ultimately, it would turn out that the debut vehicle was effectively a one-off and over the course of 14 months, SpaceX fairly quickly designed, built, and qualified an entirely new Falcon Heavy rocket based on Falcon 9’s new and improved Block 5 variant. In April 2019, after a few minor delays, that Falcon Heavy Block 5 rocket completed its own launch debut and first mission for a paying customer. This time around, all three boosters – two by land and one by sea – survived reentry and performed flawless landings on a drone ship and two Landing Zones.
A mere two months later, both of Falcon Heavy Block 5’s first two recovered side boosters flew again in support of the US Air Force’s STP-2 mission – a combined demonstration flight and rideshare mostly designed to push the rocket to its limits and help the military qualify it for high-value payloads. Once more, those side boosters successfully returned for a simultaneous landing at SpaceX’s Landing Zones but the mission’s Block 5 center core’s reentry was – as SpaceX itself partially expected – too hot, burning essential components and resulting in a hard ‘landing’ in the Atlantic Ocean. Otherwise, the mission was a spectacular success and gave the US military practically all the data it needed to qualify the world’s largest operational rocket to launch its payloads.
Shockingly, however, that June 2019 launch would end up being Falcon Heavy’s third and latest. In the almost 26 months since, the rocket hasn’t flown once. Originally scheduled to launch a fourth time as early as Q4 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic ultimately delayed the rocket’s next two launches (or gave the satellite manufacturer(s) perfect scapegoats for technical delays) into 2021.
Known as USSF-44 and USSF-52 (formerly AFSPC-44/52), both missions are scheduled to launch ethereal US military spy and/or communications satellites. USSF-44 is arguably the most important, as it will mark SpaceX’s first direct launch to geostationary orbit (GEO) for any customer – let alone one as exacting as the US military. USSF-52 is a much simpler and more traditional launch to an elliptical geostationary transfer orbit (GTO).
About a year ago, for unknown reasons, the two missions swapped positions, with USSF-44 taking the lead. Expected to launch in June 2021 as of early this year, SpaceflightNow first reported that USSF-44 had slipped further still to October – and USSF-52 into 2022 – this May. Since then, that’s where the mission’s schedule has tentatively lain.
Finally, on August 12th, SpaceX filed an FCC application for rocket communication permissions. While otherwise ordinary, this particular request stated that it was for Falcon Heavy recovery operations and, more specifically, for the simultaneous recovery of two Falcon Heavy boosters at sea. Out of an abundance of caution and conservatism and combined with the generally challenging nature of direct-to-GEO launches, Falcon Heavy’s first such mission for the US military will require SpaceX to expend the rocket’s center booster and recover both side boosters at sea with two separate drone ships.
Falcon Heavy’s USSF-52 GTO launch isn’t as demanding and its mission profile is expected to allow SpaceX to recover all three boosters. As such, an FCC filing for a dual-drone-ship Falcon Heavy side booster recoveries practically guarantees that it’s for USSF-44. Per the application, SpaceX expects the mission to occur no earlier than September 25th. Almost simultaneously, launch photographer Ben Cooper also updated a long-running list of upcoming East Coast launches, confirming that Falcon Heavy’s fourth launch (USSF-44) remains on track for October 2021.
Ultimately, while delays are possible and likely probable, there now appears to be a strong chance that Falcon Heavy will launch for the first time in 28 months before the end of 2021.
Tesla shared a striking video showcasing the decommissioning of the original Model S and Model X assembly line at its Fremont Factory in Northern California. Completed in just 46 days, the teardown involved heavy machinery dismantling concrete pits, removing robotic arms and conveyors, and clearing the space for new production.
The post, captioned “End of an era,” captured both the end of a historic chapter and Tesla’s aggressive pivot toward its next major initiative, Optimus.
End of an era: Decommissioning the original Model S & X assembly line in just 46 days pic.twitter.com/kGEdfhl62h
— Tesla Manufacturing (@gigafactories) July 10, 2026
The decision to retire the Model S and Model X originated during Tesla’s Q4 2025 Earnings Call in late January 2026. CEO Elon Musk announced that production of the company’s flagship sedan and SUV would wind down by the end of Q2 2026, describing it as bringing the programs to an “honorable discharge.”
Custom orders ceased around early April 2026, with the final vehicles rolling off the line in early May. A special signature delivery ceremony on May 20 marked the emotional close for these vehicles, which had defined Tesla’s early success and luxury EV segment since the Model S launch in 2012.
The primary reason for tearing down the lines was to repurpose the valuable factory floor space for high-volume production of Tesla’s Optimus humanoid robot. Musk had indicated on Earnings Calls that the Fremont S/X line would be replaced by a dedicated Optimus manufacturing line targeting a capacity of one million units per year.
This move aligns with Tesla’s broader strategic shift from traditional vehicle manufacturing toward robotics and artificial intelligence, leveraging the company’s expertise in autonomy, AI training, and high-volume production.
Optimus, Tesla’s general-purpose humanoid robot, is designed to perform repetitive or dangerous tasks in factories, warehouses, and eventually homes. Powered by Tesla’s AI and Neural Networks, it aims to be a versatile, affordable platform. Production of Optimus Gen 3 is already underway in limited form at Fremont, with full-scale output on the converted line expected to begin in late July or August.
Tesla is targeting rapid scaling, with internal ambitions pointing toward tens or even hundreds of thousands of units annually by the end of 2026.
Longer-term, Tesla is constructing a much larger second-generation Optimus facility at Giga Texas, with potential capacity reaching millions of units per year. The company views Optimus as a transformative product that could eventually surpass its automotive business in scale and value, enabling widespread deployment of useful robots across industries. CEO Elon Musk has even predicted it would be the most popular product of all-time.
As one era closes at Fremont, another is rapidly taking shape.
Elon Musk posted a candid admission on his social media platform X on June 9, declaring that he had been “clearly wrong” about Anthropic. The statement marked a notable reversal from his earlier skepticism toward the AI company.
In September, Musk had written, “Winning was never in the set of possible outcomes for Anthropic,” reflecting his view at the time that the startup had lacked the foundation or even the trajectory to succeed in what is an incredibly intense race for advanced artificial intelligence.
Musk’s latest post came amid discussion of Anthropic’s reliance on external compute resources. He praised the company’s progress, stating that Anthropic is “obviously currently the leader in AI” and that “no company has released a model as good as Mythos/Fable,” with expectations of a strong follow-up in Mythos 2.
The tone shifted dramatically from dismissal to acknowledgement of superior performance.
I was clearly wrong about Anthropic. They are obviously currently the leader in AI. No company has released a model as good as Mythos/Fable and they will undoubtedly have Mythos 2 ready soon.
And I would never cut them off in a way that hurt them badly, even as a competitor.…
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 9, 2026
The context of Musk’s comments added significance. Anthropic has been operating under a recent compute deal with SpaceXAI, Musk’s AI infrastructure-focused venture. The pair entered a short-term GPU lease agreement initiated in May, providing Anthropic access to critical computing power for training and deploying its frontier models.
SpaceXAI signs agreement with Anthropic for massive AI supercomputer access
Some observers had speculated that Musk could leverage this dependency to disadvantage a rival. Musk directly addressed the possibility, writing, “I would never cut them off in a way that hurt them badly, even as a competitor. That’s not my style.”
To support his commitment to ethical competition, Musk referenced concrete examples from his other companies. Tesla famously open-sourced its entire portfolio of electric vehicle patents in 2014. The move was designed to accelerate the global adoption of sustainable transportation technology rather than protect proprietary advantages.
Tesla also made its Supercharger network available to competing electric vehicle manufacturers, transforming what could have remained an exclusive charging ecosystem into a shared infrastructure that benefits the broader industry and reduces barriers for EV adoption.
Musk further pointed to SpaceX’s practices, noting that the company launches satellites for competing commercial systems “with no increase in price or use of unfair terms.” He extended the principle to his social platform, observing that “even my worst enemies attack me on this platform,” underscoring preference for open discourse over retaliation.
These examples have illustrated Musk’s long-standing philosophy that long-term technological progress is best served by open competition and infrastructure sharing rather than leveraging market power to stifle rivals. In the fast-evolving AI sector, where compute resources and model capabilities determine leadership, Musk’s stance suggests a willingness to compete on innovation and performance alone.
Musk’s admission arrives as SpaceXAI itself advances its own frontier models while maintaining business relationships across the ecosystem. By publicly correcting his earlier assessment and reaffirming principles of fair play, Musk highlights a model of competition that prioritizes advancement of the field over short-term tactical advantages.
A Tesla analyst believes the company’s Full Self-Driving suite is close to an “inflection point,” where people will finally realize that it is more than what it appears, similar to how many view the iPhone.
Pierre Ferragu, an analyst who has covered Tesla for many years at New Street Research, says the Full Self-Driving suite is one piece of evidence supporting the view that a Tesla is more than a car. He compared it to the iPhone and noted that the high price tag seemed like a lot for a phone early on. Then people realized the iPhone was more than just something you make calls with. It made their lives simpler.
🚨 Analyst @p_ferragu says Tesla Full Self-Driving is at an “inflection point” in a recent commentary:
“A Tesla is not a car, the same way an iPhone was not a phone. As a tool that gets you to work peacefully every morning, it is not expensive. Give us 2 more quarters to see… pic.twitter.com/tm6xFrjVPV
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 10, 2026
Suddenly, that price tag was justified.
Tesla offers several models under the average transaction price for a new vehicle, which was above $49,000, according to Kelley Blue Book. However, that does not take into account that many people can still not afford a $35,000 vehicle. Ferragu offers his thoughts:
“Remember when the addressable market of the iPhone was 10 million units? Then people realized how good it was, and now, nearly 250m are sold every year.
A similar evolution for Tesla is still on the table. A Tesla is not a car, the same way an iPhone was not a phone.
A model 3 at $35k + $100 per month is too expensive for most, but only as a car, the same way a $600 iPhone was too expensive for most, until most realized it was much more than a phone.
As a tool that gets you to work peacefully every morning, it is not expensive.”
This point is valid, especially considering the iPhone’s impact on the cell phone market. There are still a handful of players, but most people you know have an iPhone. The iPhone ties into Apple’s other ecosystem of products.
This is how Tesla plans to infiltrate the automotive market, and once the company offers a fully autonomous suite, or something that can allow for unsupervised self-driving, more and more people will flock to Tesla.
Ferragu believes Tesla needs two additional quarters of development before things will truly change. He didn’t elaborate on what will happen in two quarters, but he said it will give us all time to “see where this is heading.”
It is really quite interesting to see people’s reactions when they find out what a Tesla is capable of. Full Self-Driving is a great tool for taking stress out of travel; I use it daily, and it has made it really difficult to consider taking any other car on a drive of practically any length.
To me, it is really hard to believe that people will not at least seriously consider a Tesla as their next car if they experience Full Self-Driving. This is a major point for those who argue that Tesla should advertise in some way.
Tesla shows rapid teardown of Model S and X lines, paving the way for Optimus at Fremont
Elon Musk admits he was ‘clearly wrong’ about Anthropic
