Update: No official comment has been offered but sourced reports indicate that SpaceX’s second Falcon Heavy launch will slip from a target of April 7th into “next week”, April 8-14. The massive rocket’s critical static fire test has also been pushed from April 4th to 5th, allowing additional time for SpaceX engineers and technicians to verify Falcon Heavy’s health. Stay tuned as we get closer to that test ignition and SpaceX releasing an official launch date.
The first Block 5 variant of SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy rocket has rolled out to Launch Pad 39A for an inaugural launch that could occur as early as April 7th. Minor delays, however, are extremely likely for the second Falcon Heavy launch attempt ever, with the most likely dates resting closer to April 8-11.
With an appearance noticeably deviating from Falcon 9
Above all else, it should be noted that the likelihood of Falcon Heavy Flight 2’s actual launch date slipping is not to say that anything at all is technically or operationally wrong with the rocket or ground support equipment (GSE). Rather, it’s simply a dose of pragmatism for a launch date that was originally approved on the range alongside a static fire on March 31st. In other words, SpaceX was anticipating the need for approximately seven days between static fire and launch, a fairly believable target relative to Falcon Heavy’s first launch flow.
Even if SpaceX completes a flawless Falcon Heavy static fire immediately after the 6 pm EDT window opens, this would give company engineers and technicians less than 72 hours to turn the rocket around for launch as soon as 6:36 pm EDT on April 7th. That process involves a huge amount of work, including the actual static fire, safely
Safely completing that work in ~72 hours is extremely difficult for Falcon 9, let alone a significantly modified Falcon Heavy preparing for the vehicle’s second launch attempt ever. For reference, excluding a few outlier launches, Falcon 9 Block 5’s mean time between static fire and launch is ~4.7 days, while the mode is 5 days (6/10 launches). Outliers include missions like SSO-A, DM-1, and GPS III SV01, all of which required unique care and caution for various reasons. Chances are good that Falcon Heavy Flight 2 will probably improve upon Flight 1, which took several days to complete a static fire and 13 more days before a launch attempt. Still, the rocket is very unlikely to beat Falcon 9 Block 5’s average time-to-launch.
All in good time
There is probably a 5% chance of Falcon Heavy launching on April 7th even if the static fire happens right on time and shows all systems running in the green. If SpaceX is unable to fit a static fire into the April 4th window, that will likely slip to 0%. Either way, we can expect SpaceX to provide an updated launch window or rough estimate as early as today, especially if the static fire test is successfully completed.
In the meantime, drone ship
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
Elon Musk
SpaceX secures FAA approval for 44 annual Starship launches in Florida
The FAA’s environmental review covers up to 44 launches annually, along with 44 Super Heavy booster landings and 44 upper-stage landings.
SpaceX has received environmental approval from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to conduct up to 44 Starship-Super Heavy launches per year from Kennedy Space Center Launch Complex 39A in Florida.
The decision allows the company to proceed with plans tied to its next-generation launch system and future satellite deployments.
The FAA’s environmental review covers up to 44 launches annually, along with 44 Super Heavy booster landings and 44 upper-stage landings. The approval concludes the agency’s public comment period and outlines required mitigation measures related to noise, emissions, wildlife, and airspace management.
Construction of Starship infrastructure at Launch Complex 39A is nearing completion. The site, previously used for Apollo and space shuttle missions, is transitioning to support Starship operations, as noted in a Florida Today report.
If fully deployed across Kennedy Space Center and nearby Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, Starship activity on the Space Coast could exceed 120 launches annually, excluding tests. Separately, the U.S. Air Force has authorized repurposing Space Launch Complex 37 for potential additional Starship activity, pending further FAA airspace analysis.
The approval supports SpaceX’s long-term strategy, which includes deploying a large constellation of satellites intended to power space-based artificial intelligence data infrastructure. The company has previously indicated that expanded Starship capacity will be central to that effort.
The FAA review identified likely impacts from increased noise, nitrogen oxide emissions, and temporary airspace closures. Commercial flights may experience periodic delays during launch windows. The agency, however, determined these effects would be intermittent and manageable through scheduling, public notification, and worker safety protocols.
Wildlife protections are required under the approval, Florida Today noted. These include lighting controls to protect sea turtles, seasonal monitoring of scrub jays and beach mice, and restrictions on offshore landings to avoid coral reefs and right whale critical habitat. Recovery vessels must also carry trained observers to prevent collisions with protected marine species.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk reiterates rapid Starship V3 timeline with next launch in sight
Musk shared the update in a brief post on X, writing, “Starship flies again next month.”
Elon Musk has confirmed that Starship will fly again next month, reiterating SpaceX’s aggressive timeline for the first launch of its Starship V3 rocket.
Musk shared the update in a brief post on X, writing, “Starship flies again next month.” The CEO’s post was accompanied by a video of Starship’s Super Heavy booster being successfully caught by a launch tower in Starbase, Texas.
The timeline is notable. In late January, Musk stated that Starship’s next flight, Flight 12, was expected in about six weeks. This placed the expected mission date sometime in March. That estimate aligned with SpaceX’s earlier statement that Starship’s 12th flight test “remains targeted for the first quarter of 2026.”
If the vehicle does indeed fly next month, it would mark the debut of Starship V3, the upgraded platform expected to feature the rocket’s new Raptor V3 engines.
Raptor V3 is designed to deliver significantly higher thrust than earlier versions while reducing cost and weight. Starship V3 itself is expected to be optimized for manufacturability, a critical step if SpaceX intends to scale production toward frequent launches for Starlink, lunar missions, and eventually Mars.
Starship V3 is widely viewed as the version that transitions the program from experimental testing to true operational scaling. Previous iterations have completed multiple integrated flight tests, with mixed outcomes but steady progress. Expectations are high that SpaceX is now working on Starship’s refinement.
An aggressive launch schedule supports several priorities at once. It advances Starlink’s next-generation satellite deployment, supports NASA’s lunar ambitions under Artemis, and keeps SpaceX on track for its longer-term Moon and Mars objectives.
Elon Musk
Musk company boycott proposal at City Council meeting gets weird and ironic
The City of Davis in California held a weekly city council meeting on Tuesday, where it voted on a proposal to ban Musk-operated companies. It got weird and ironic.
A city council meeting in California that proposed banning the entry of new contracts with companies controlled by Elon Musk got weird and ironic on Tuesday night after councilmembers were forced to admit some of the entities would benefit the community.
The City of Davis in California held a weekly city council meeting on Tuesday, where it voted on a proposal called “Resolution Ending Engagement With Elon Musk-Controlled Companies and To Encourage CalPERS To Divest Stock In These Companies.”
The proposal claimed that Musk ” has used his influence and corporate platforms to promote political ideologies and activities that threaten democratic norms and institutions, including campaign finance activities that raise ethical and legal concerns.”
We reported on it on Tuesday before the meeting:
California city weighs banning Elon Musk companies like Tesla and SpaceX
However, the meeting is now published online, and it truly got strange.
While it was supported by various members of the community, you could truly tell who was completely misinformed about the influence of Musk’s companies, their current status from an economic and competitive standpoint, and how much some of Musk’s companies’ projects benefit the community.
City Council Member Admits Starlink is Helpful
One City Council member was forced to admit that Starlink, the satellite internet project established by Musk’s SpaceX, was beneficial to the community because the emergency response system utilized it for EMS, Fire, and Police communications in the event of a power outage.
After public comments were heard, councilmembers amended some of the language in the proposal to not include Starlink because of its benefits to public safety.
One community member even said, “There should be exceptions to the rule.”
🚨 After the City of Davis, California, held its City Council meeting on Tuesday and voted on a resolution called “Resolution Ending Engagement With Elon Musk-Controlled Companies and To Encourage CalPERS To Divest Stock In These Companies,” it was forced to admit that it needs… pic.twitter.com/hQiCIX3yll
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) February 19, 2026
Community Members Report Out of Touch Mainstream Media Narratives
Many community members very obviously read big bold headlines about how horribly Tesla is performing in terms of electric vehicles. Many pointed to “labor intimidation” tactics being used at the company’s Fremont Factory, racial discrimination lawsuits, and Musk’s political involvement as clear-cut reasons why Davis should not consider his companies for future contracts.
However, it was interesting to hear some of them speak, very obviously out of touch with reality.
Musk has encouraged unions to propose organizing at the Fremont Factory, stating that many employees would not be on board because they are already treated very well. In 2022, he invited Union leaders to come to Fremont “at their convenience.”
The UAW never took the opportunity.
Some have argued that Tesla prevented pro-union clothing at Fremont, which it did for safety reasons. An appeals court sided with Tesla, stating that the company had a right to enforce work uniforms to ensure employee safety.
Another community member said that Tesla was losing market share in the U.S. due to growing competition from legacy automakers.
“Plus, these existing auto companies have learned a lot from what Tesla has done,” she said. Interestingly, Ford, General Motors, and Stellantis have all pulled back from their EV ambitions significantly. All three took billions in financial hits.
One Resident Crosses a Line
One resident’s time at the podium included this:
Another member of the community did this…a member of the City Council admonished him and it came to a verbal spat https://t.co/zWvKCiCkie pic.twitter.com/1L334qq9av
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) February 19, 2026
He was admonished by City Council member Bapu Vaitla, who said his actions were offensive. The two sparred verbally for a few seconds before their argument ended.
City Council Vote Result
Ultimately, the City of Davis chose to pass the motion, but they also amended it to exclude Starlink because of its emergency system benefits.
Tesla is making two big upgrades to the Model 3, coding shows
SpaceX secures FAA approval for 44 annual Starship launches in Florida
