News
SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket rolls to pad for Tuesday launch, dual booster landing
A SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket has rolled out to Kennedy Space Center Pad 39A for its first launch (and dual booster landing) in almost three and a half years.
Missing its payload fairing and the US Space Force’s classified USSF-44 payload, SpaceX’s fourth Falcon Heavy rocket rolled out to Pad 39A for the first time on October 25th. On the 27th, the rocket successfully fired up all 27 of its first-stage Merlin 1D engines, reasserting its status as the most powerful operational rocket in the world. On October 30th, SpaceX finally brought Falcon Heavy horizontal and rolled the rocket back to Pad 39A’s integration hangar, where the USSF-44 mission’s several payloads – safely stowed inside a payload fairing – were installed on the rocket.
24 hours later, Falcon Heavy – now fully assembled – departed the hangar again. According to the US Space Systems Command (SSC), despite the exceptionally late rollout on October 31st, SpaceX is on track to launch Falcon Heavy no earlier than (NET) 9:41 am EDT (13:41 UTC) on Tuesday, November 1st.
As previously discussed on Teslarati, USSF-44 will be SpaceX’s first attempt at a direct launch to a geostationary orbit (GEO) some ~36,000 kilometers (~22,400 mi) above Earth’s surface, where spacecraft can hover motionless over their region of choice. To accomplish that feat, Falcon Heavy’s upper stage will need to survive a roughly six-hour coast in the harsh vacuum of space, likely making USSF-44 one of the most challenging missions SpaceX has ever attempted.
“Long orbital coasts of six or so hours are necessary for some of the most challenging launch trajectories. Direct-to-geostationary launches are the most common mission requiring long coast capabilities and are often demanded by the US military. When Falcon’s upper stage gets too cold, its kerosene fuel – which freezes at a much higher temperature than Falcon’s liquid oxygen oxidizer – becomes viscous and slush-like before it becomes solid. If ingested in Falcon’s Merlin Vacuum engine, slushy fuel would likely prevent ignition or outright destroy it.“
Teslarati.com – October 10th, 2022
Simultaneously, while worrying about kerosene fuel getting too cold, SpaceX must also ensure that the Falcon upper stage’s cryogenic liquid oxygen (LOx) oxidizer doesn’t boil into gas. If too much LOx warms up and has to be vented out as it turns to gas, the Falcon upper stage could find itself without enough propellant to complete its geostationary orbit circularization burn.
LOx is far less stable, which makes it a bit ironic that the upper stage’s fuel tank bares the only visible sign of the tweaks needed to survive a long coast. To keep the RP1 fuel warmer in orbit, SpaceX has added a layer of grey paint to the RP1 tank, increasing the amount of heat that can be absorbed through unfiltered sunlight. The uninsulated LOx tank, meanwhile, benefits from the unintuitive fact that a cryogenic liquid can stay liquid for a surprisingly long time because some of it warms up and boils off as a gas, sacrificing a small quantity to keep the rest cool.
According to the US Space Force, USSF-44 will carry several “various payloads” attached to the second Northrop Grumman “Long Duration Propulsive EELV (Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle) Secondary Payload Adapter” or LDPE-2 – essentially a long-duration kick stage. Cataloged on EverydayAstronaut.com, the payloads include two Lockheed Martin LINUSS-A cubesats that will demonstrate a handful of new technologies and capabilities; TETRA-1, a microsat built by Millenium Space Systems to test on-orbit maneuverability; and a communications satellite prototype called USUVL. Spaceflight Now reports that LPDE-2 will carry three hosted payloads and deploy three satellites.
Finally, a recent Space Systems Command press release [PDF] mentioned a mysterious “Shepard demonstration” – likely a second propulsive kick stage – for the first time, which almost nothing is known about. It’s unclear if there is a main classified satellite the mission revolves around or if USSF-44 is simply a collection of various rideshare payloads headed to GEO.
Regardless, to launch them directly into geostationary orbit, USSF-44 will mark the first time SpaceX intentionally expends a Falcon Heavy booster. Over three previous launches, SpaceX only managed to land a Falcon Heavy center core once, but that core then tipped over and was destroyed at sea. Two other attempts resulted in failed landings. USSF-44 will continue that trend. Falcon Heavy’s twin side boosters will attempt to continue a more positive trend of simultaneous side-by-side landings and boost back to Florida to touch down at SpaceX’s LZ-1 and LZ-2 pads. SpaceX will also attempt to recover both halves of Falcon Heavy’s payload fairing a record-breaking 1410 kilometers (876 mi) off the Florida coast.
SpaceX says weather is 90% favorable for Falcon Heavy’s November 1st launch attempt. Stay tuned for a link to the company’s official webcast.
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
