News
SpaceX fan spots sooty Falcon 9 Block 5 booster at Kennedy Space Center
On July 2nd, Twitter user Sideralmente (@astroperinaldo) spotted a sooty Falcon 9 Block 5 booster arriving at SpaceX’s Pad 39A hangar facilities, currently operating as a sort of defacto refurbishment hub.
Likely a prelude to a near-term launch, SpaceX has several missions scheduled over the next few months. More likely than not, all of them will fly on flight-proven Falcon 9 boosters, now so common that launching new boosters has started to feel exceedingly rare and unusual. July 2nd’s booster spotting is also a rare (albeit slightly less rare) treat, given the general lack of access (aside from a bus tour) members of the public have to Kennedy Space Center’s operational facilities and the total lack of access they have to Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, home of SpaceX’s most active launch pad (LC-40).
CRS-18
Up next for SpaceX is Cargo Dragon CRS-18, the spacecraft’s second International Space Station (ISS) resupply mission this year. At least over the last 2-3 years, SpaceX and NASA have been fairly consistent with Cargo Dragon launches in the winter, late-spring/early-summer, and late-fall (Q1, Q2/Q3, Q4) for an average of three launches annually. 2018/2019 is no different: CRS-16 launched in early-December 2018 and CRS-17 in early-May 2019, while CRS-18 is scheduled to launch NET 7:35 pm ET, July 21st and CRS-19 is targeted for early-December 2019.
Meanwhile, CRS-18 is also expected to be the first time a NASA mission launches on a flight-proven Falcon 9 Block 5 booster, potentially paving the way for NASA’s first launch on a twice-flown Block 5 booster with CRS-19 – hopefully later this year. Of course, that subsequent milestone will depend on a successful launch and landing during CRS-18. Falcon 9 booster B1056 – previously tasked with launching CRS-17 on May 4th, 2019 – is assigned to the mission and has been speedily refurbished for its next mission. Assuming the static fire goes well and there are no anomalies over the next 11 days, B1056 will launch twice in 78 days, a close second to B1048, B1052, and B1053 – all tied for first place at 74 days.
AMOS-17
Following CRS-18, SpaceX’s next launch is expected to occur soon after, launching Spacecom’s AMOS-17 communications satellite on a Falcon 9 (likely flight-proven) no earlier than early-August, although the tail-end of July is also a possibility. This mission will be extremely symbolic, owing to the fact that AMOS-17 is effectively an insurance-funded replacement for AMOS-6, destroyed on September 1st, 2016 when Falcon 9 suffered a catastrophic failure.
Thankfully, since that failure nearly three years ago, Falcon 9 has performed admirably, suffering no publicly-known failures or partial failures during its primary mission, although SpaceX has suffered two failed booster landing attempts over the same period.
It’s possible that the mystery booster spotted above is meant for AMOS-17, although that’s far from certain. Based on an image showing the core number, it is almost certainly B104X, while the second digit could easily be a 7 or a 9. If the booster in question is B1047, the odds are much better that it’s wrapping up refurbishment and waiting at 39A for CRS-18 to launch before heading to LC-40.
Starlink?
On the other hand, if the booster in question is B1049, it can be all but guaranteed that AMOS-17 will not launch on it, the reason being that – quite literally burned by its last experience with Falcon 9 – Spacecom probably doesn’t want to be the first SpaceX customer to launch on a thrice-flown booster. At the same time, SpaceX is probably exceptionally conscious of the need to ensure mission success and has no interest in adding risk to the AMOS-17 mission profile, no matter how minor.
B1049 launched for the third time in support of SpaceX’s first dedicated Starlink launch on May 23rd, known internally as Starlink v0.9. At this point in time, B1046.3 is believed to be assigned to Crew Dragon’s in-flight abort (IFA) test, expected no earlier than Q4 2019. B1048.3’s status is unknown since the rocket successfully completed its third launch in February 2019. With B1049’s newfound history as the first SpaceX booster to launch on a completely internal mission, it would make a lot of sense for SpaceX to reuse B1049 for the next Starlink mission.
Simultaneously, SpaceX could demonstrate the first launch of a thrice-flown Falcon 9 booster without pushing that risk onto customers, opening up B1048 and future thrice-flown boosters for near-term commercial missions. A step further, this would set SpaceX up perfectly to use internal Starlink missions as full-fidelity demonstrations of booster reuse milestones, going from the four launches to five, six, seven, and beyond.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
-
Elon Musk issued a second pointed warning to SpaceX short sellers on Tuesday, just hours before the company was set to release its first quarterly earnings as a publicly traded firm. Responding to a report highlighting elevated short interest, Musk wrote on X: “I try to warn them, but they just double down …”
The comment came as data from S3 Partners showed roughly 95 percent of available SPCX shares to borrow were on loan, translating to about 34 percent short interest as a percentage of the float. The stock has traded under pressure since its record-breaking IPO in June 2026, declining significantly from early peaks.
I try to warn them, but they just double down … 🤷♂️
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) August 4, 2026
This marks the second such message from Musk in under three weeks.
On July 17, amid post-IPO volatility, he stated: “The survival probability of firms who maintain a significant short position in SpaceX over time is very low.” At that time, SPCX had fallen roughly 30 percent from its peak above a $2.6 trillion valuation, with short sellers reportedly realizing gains of about $8.7 billion.
Musk’s warning aligned with optimistic analyses projecting that Starship-driven cost reductions could enable a multi-trillion-dollar space economy through applications such as orbital solar power, asteroid mining, data centers, and Mars-related projects, positioning SpaceX as critical infrastructure.
SpaceX is scheduled to report second-quarter results after the market close later today, followed by a webcast. Analysts anticipate revenue near $6.9 billion, reflecting growth in Starlink, launch services, and AI-related segments. The earnings release precedes a major lockup expiration on August 6 that could free hundreds of millions of insider shares.
Musk has a long track record of confronting short sellers, particularly regarding Tesla, where he has argued that persistent bearish positions underestimate transformative technologies. Critics view his optimism as overly ambitious given near-term stock fluctuations, while supporters see temporary dips as opportunities in a longer-term expansion of the space economy.
As SpaceX opens its books to public scrutiny for the first time, the high short interest and Musk’s repeated cautions set the stage for heightened market attention on the results and management’s commentary.
Tesla’s AI lead Ashok Elluswamy doubled down on the company’s strategy regarding Full Self-Driving’s speed settings, and owners are definitely confused.
Earlier versions of Full Self-Driving allowed owners to set a max speed that the vehicle could travel while operating under the semi-autonomous driver assistance platform. This allowed more customization for the driver, giving them the ability to experience FSD’s robust performance with their own personal preferences.
Speed is massively important for obvious reasons — it’s not only a question of keeping the vehicle occupants comfortable by traveling at a safe speed, but it’s also something that could contribute to a ticket or infraction from law enforcement.
With the release of FSD v14 last year, Tesla removed the ability to set a max speed and instead opted for five Speed Profiles, ranging from “Sloth,” the most conservative, to “Mad Max,” the most aggressive and spirited. These profiles not only control speed, but also how frequently the vehicle will execute passes, perform lane changes, and other contributing factors.
The removal of the Max Speed setting was a major complaint amongst the Tesla community because it left owners scrambling for a way to experience suitable behaviors while traveling at an appropriate speed. Most felt the driving profiles would be a good indicator of the behaviors, while speed would still be left up to the discretion of the driver.
Instead, Tesla’s Speed Profiles determine both, and the constant tinkering of how they behave has been a major bottleneck and point of confusion for both owners and the company. From update to update, the Speed Profiles will change, sometimes more drastically than others. Some owners have complained that the “Standard” profile is too fast, while others have experienced “Mad Max” traveling below the speed limit:
What has happened to Mad Max?
At one point it was going 32 in a 35. Traffic ahead had pulled away considerably https://t.co/bjKvaMVTNX pic.twitter.com/aaZSWmLu5v
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) January 24, 2026
These things change with each update, but the big complaint is that owners are on the hook for any tickets that come from FSD’s infractions; that’s the caveat of the suite being named FSD (Supervised). It ultimately means the driver is responsible, and the automaker has no liability when it comes to speeding tickets or general traffic infractions.
It is the driver’s responsibility to take over or adjust based on this.
Elluswamy essentially confirmed that there are no plans to bring back Max Speed control, because it is what he referred to as “an anti pattern.” He then echoed something that CEO Elon Musk has started to really push with FSD, and that’s the idea that Tesla is really honing in on the preferences of the driver.
Max speed control is an anti pattern.
We are working on better learning of user’s implied preferences.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) August 3, 2026
Owners were confused by Tesla’s decision, stating that there must be a better way, especially considering disengagements for incorrect speeds are common:
This…. is not the way
— Kyle Conner (@itskyleconner) August 4, 2026
😭 I appreciate this mentality ! But currently the no.1 reason I disengage in Australia is incorrect speed zones.
— Ryan’s Model Y (@ryanjaycowan) August 3, 2026
This is fine but you need to start accepting liability for speeding tickets then. https://t.co/lyCgdA83gQ
— Jeremy Judkins (@jeremyjudkins_) August 4, 2026
Okay https://t.co/nOvoXQkNg1 pic.twitter.com/jGRtF2xtox
— Chad Moran (@ChadMoran) August 3, 2026
From personal experience and using FSD for over 72 percent of my driving miles since v14 was released late last year, I make Speed Profile adjustments constantly. If FSD is traveling a tad too quickly, I will scale it back, and if it’s too conservative, I’ll make it more aggressive.
I don’t complain about making the Speed Profile changes too frequently, but it would certainly be nice to have it happen less frequently. There are far too many times I am concerned about getting a ticket, even in Standard mode.
The biggest issue for me, personally, which seems to be echoed throughout the community, is the fact that Tesla’s goal is to minimize disengagements. Many drivers are stating that speed is a major reason for disengagements.
However, Tesla is not willing to bring back this one level of input because it would technically be a regression.
Whether it’s right or wrong in your opinion, it is what Tesla is going with, and it seems like it has pivoted quite a bit from its other strategies for minimizing interventions by pushing its AI to behave in a way that would fit the occupant’s personal preferences.
Tesla is one of several automakers whose vehicles qualify for an awesome new first-time EV buyer incentive program in California.
The Golden State launched the MyFirstEV incentive program, which helps those buying an electric vehicle for the first time with a $3,500 incentive on new-inventory purchases of a Model 3 or Model Y.
First-time electric vehicle buyers in California can now get $3,500 off eligible Model 3 and Model Y new inventory vehicle purchases.
To be eligible, you must place your order on or after August 3, 2026 and take delivery while funds are still available. The incentive applies to… pic.twitter.com/yuXF00XA50
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) August 4, 2026
The incentive requires an order on or after August 3, and delivery must be taken while the program is still being funded. California has set aside $135.5 million to help strengthen its SEV market and support automotive innovation.
Incentives are offered at the point of sale, and used EVs are also available for a partial incentive of $1,750. Half of the $3,500 and $1,750 incentive amounts are covered by California, with the other half being covered by participating OEMs.
Additionally, rules apply for MSRP and how the vehicle will qualify for the incentive. Any vehicle from a non-California headquartered OEM must have an MSRP of $50,000 or less. Used vehicles must be priced at $25,000 or less and must be at least two model years older than the year of purchase.
The cars must also be purchased from manufacturers as certified pre-owned vehicles. Private dealerships are not eligible.
In total, California expects to incentivize over 73,000 ZEVs.
Participating Manufacturers
Fourteen total automakers are participating in California’s MyFirstEV program:
- Chevrolet – Launching August 2026
- Ford – Launching August 2026
- Honda – Launching September 2026
- Hyundai – Launching August 2026
- Kia – Launching August 2026
- Lexus – Launching September 2026
- Lucid – Launching August 2026
- Mitsubishi – Launching November 2026
- Nissan – Coming Soon
- Rivian – Coming Soon
- Subaru – Launching September 2026
- Tesla – Launching August 2026
- Toyota – Launching September 2026
- Volvo – Coming Soon
Elon Musk sends second warning to SpaceX shorts ahead of first earnings
Tesla’s AI lead doubles down on FSD’s speed strategy, and owners are confused
