News
SpaceX’s second Falcon Heavy booster arrives in Florida as launch #2 closes in
SpaceX’s second Falcon Heavy side booster has made its way from Texas to Florida after completing a successful static fire acceptance test at the company’s McGregor complex, paving the way for the third and final booster – currently vertical on McGregor’s test stand – to complete its own round of tests and head East.
Once the third and most important booster – known as the center core – arrives at SpaceX’s Florida launch facilities, all three of the next Falcon Heavy’s boosters will be ready to head into the integration stage, culminating in an integrated static fire prior to the second launch ever of SpaceX’s flagship super-heavy-lift rocket.
A Texas pilot happened to fly by SpaceX’s McGregor facilities on January 11th, catching a live glimpse of a Merlin Vacuum (MVac) or second stage static fire test, as well a Falcon booster – perhaps Falcon Heavy’s next center core – vertical on the facility’s booster static fire stand. While it has not yet been visually confirmed as the next Falcon Heavy center core, a booster traveling through the Waco, Texas area to McGregor was spotted with protuberances that are not normally seen on regular Falcon 9 boosters and happened to be in the right place for FH-specific hardware.
-
- A booster – likely the next Falcon Heavy center core – was vertical at McGregor’s S1 static fire stand. (Instagram /u/tcryguy)
-
- An MVac or Falcon 9 S2 performs a static fire at McGregor. (Instagram /u/tcryguy)
There is also a case to be made that – per the fact that the first two side boosters have been built, shipped, tested, and delivered back-to-back – SpaceX chose to consecutively manufacture all hardware needed for the second Falcon Heavy instead of producing one or a few single-stick Falcon 9 boosters in between, which the appearance of a center core-like rocket in Texas certainly helps corroborate. While Falcon Heavy side boosters are effectively just Falcon 9 boosters with a few additional attachments and nose cones, currently scheduling indicates that SpaceX may attempt to rapidly turn all three Falcon Heavy Flight 2 boosters around perhaps just 30-60 days after their first launch. Otherwise, once the rocket’s 2019 launches have been completed, both side boosters can be converted back into Falcon 9 boosters and thus reenter SpaceX’s active fleet of flight-proven rockets.
Falcon Heavy’s center core, however, is dramatically different than a regular Falcon 9 booster, owing to the fact that it needs to essentially support triple the thrust and mechanical stresses as single-stick launches. The rocket’s design works to improve payload performance by using the two side cores to boost the center core and leave it with far more propellant left over than Falcon 9 would during a comparable launch profile, roughly equivalent to a three-person bike where only two people are pedaling hard. During a Falcon Heavy launch, side boosters thus separate a solid 30-60 seconds before the center core parts ways with the upper stage and payload.
-
- A diagram from a recent SpaceX document offers an idea of what Falcon Heavy Block 5 will look like. (SpaceX)
-
- The first Falcon Heavy, seen here fully integrated aside from its payload fairing. (SpaceX)
-
- Falcon Heavy just prior to its launch debut, February 2018. (Tom Cross)
-
- SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy prepares for the huge rocket’s inaugural launch. (SpaceX)
-
- LZ-1 and LZ-2, circa February 2018. (SpaceX)
Thanks to its significant differences, it’s highly unlikely – if not impossible – for a Falcon Heavy center core to launch a regular Falcon 9 mission. As such, once Falcon Heavy’s 2019 launches are completed, the center core will most likely be processed, refurbished, and then stored until the next Falcon Heavy payload is ready to go, at which point Falcon 9 boosters would be converted into Heavy side cores. Given that the Block 5 upgrade is designed to allow Falcon boosters to perform as many as 10 launches with minimal to no refurbishment and 100+ with regular repairs and maintenance, it’s entirely possible that a single Falcon Heavy center core could theoretically support all possible future launches of the rocket.
In reality, customers like the USAF and NASA will probably request new hardware for foreseeable Falcon Heavy launches, most of which would likely be extremely expensive flagship satellites (AFSPC-52) or interplanetary spacecraft (Europa Clipper).
Fans of @SpaceX will be interested to note that the government is now taking very seriously the possibility of flying Clipper on the Falcon Heavy.
— Eric Berger (@SciGuySpace) December 3, 2018
Falcon Heavy’s next two launches are planned as early as March (a large communications satellite called Arabsat 6A) and April (an experimental USAF launch called STP-2 with two dozen separate payloads). With two side boosters already in Florida, those dates are now serious possibilities, and the center core’s arrival will be the telltale sign that Falcon Heavy’s second launch ever is imminent.
Elon Musk
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Four Raptor engines failed to ignite at T-zero, forcing SpaceX to scrub Starship Flight 13 Thursday.
SpaceX scrubbed the Starship Flight 13 launch attempt Thursday evening at the last possible moment, after four of the Super Heavy booster’s 33 Raptor 3 engines failed to ignite during the startup sequence. The 90-minute window had opened at 6:45 p.m. EDT from Starbase in Boca Chica, Texas, and the countdown had proceeded without issue all day, with more than 11.5 million pounds of liquid methane and liquid oxygen being fully loaded into the rocket before the automated abort triggered. SpaceX’s launch directors posted on X, “Standing down from today’s flight test attempt,” and shut down the livestream shortly after.
Musk confirmed the root cause within hours. “Some of the engines didn’t start, triggering an automatic launch abort,” he wrote on X. “To be confident of a good flight, 2 Raptors will be removed and replaced. Most probable launch timing is early next week.” SpaceX engineers began draining propellant tanks immediately and Booster 20 was rolled back to its hangar for inspection.
The timing adds a layer of significance that did not exist during any of the previous 12 Starship flights. This is the first time SpaceX has attempted to launch Starship since the company made its stock market debut in June, listing under ticker SPCX at $135 per share. Public investors are now watching every Starship outcome in real time, and a last-second abort carries more visibility than it would have six months ago.
Flight 13 was designed to be one of the most consequential tests in the program’s history. It was set to carry 20 Starlink V3 satellites, the first operational payload Starship has ever attempted to deploy. Six of those satellites carried external cameras to photograph Starship’s heat shield from the outside during flight, which would act as a self-inspection approach SpaceX has never attempted before. The mission also needed to complete a Raptor engine relight in space, a step SpaceX skipped on Flight 12 in May after losing an engine during ascent. That Flight 12 booster also flipped 90 degrees off course during its boostback burn when five engines failed to reignite.
SpaceX has not announced an official next launch date. Musk’s “early next week” window points to July 21 or 22 at the earliest, pending the engine swap and a return to the pad.
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.
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
