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
Tesla CEO Elon Musk sends rivals dire warning about Full Self-Driving
Tesla CEO Elon Musk revealed today on the social media platform X that legacy automakers, such as Ford, General Motors, and Stellantis, do not want to license the company’s Full Self-Driving suite, at least not without a long list of their own terms.
“I’ve tried to warn them and even offered to license Tesla FSD, but they don’t want it! Crazy,” Musk said on X. “When legacy auto does occasionally reach out, they tepidly discuss implementing FSD for a tiny program in 5 years with unworkable requirements for Tesla, so pointless.”
I’ve tried to warn them and even offered to license Tesla FSD, but they don’t want it! Crazy …
When legacy auto does occasionally reach out, they tepidly discuss implementing FSD for a tiny program in 5 years with unworkable requirements for Tesla, so pointless. 🤷♂️
🦕 🦕
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 24, 2025
Musk made the remark in response to a note we wrote about earlier today from Melius Research, in which analyst Rob Wertheimer said, “Our point is not that Tesla is at risk, it’s that everybody else is,” in terms of autonomy and self-driving development.
Wertheimer believes there are hundreds of billions of dollars in value headed toward Tesla’s way because of its prowess with FSD.
A few years ago, Musk first remarked that Tesla was in early talks with one legacy automaker regarding licensing Full Self-Driving for its vehicles. Tesla never confirmed which company it was, but given Musk’s ongoing talks with Ford CEO Jim Farley at the time, it seemed the Detroit-based automaker was the likely suspect.
Tesla’s Elon Musk reiterates FSD licensing offer for other automakers
Ford has been perhaps the most aggressive legacy automaker in terms of its EV efforts, but it recently scaled back its electric offensive due to profitability issues and weak demand. It simply was not making enough vehicles, nor selling the volume needed to turn a profit.
Musk truly believes that many of the companies that turn their backs on FSD now will suffer in the future, especially considering the increased chance it could be a parallel to what has happened with EV efforts for many of these companies.
Unfortunately, they got started too late and are now playing catch-up with Tesla, XPeng, BYD, and the other dominating forces in EVs across the globe.
News
Tesla backtracks on strange Nav feature after numerous complaints
Tesla is backtracking on a strange adjustment it made to its in-car Navigation feature after numerous complaints from owners convinced the company to make a change.
Tesla’s in-car Navigation is catered to its vehicles, as it routes Supercharging stops and preps your vehicle for charging with preconditioning. It is also very intuitive, and features other things like weather radar and a detailed map outlining points of interest.
However, a recent change to the Navigation by Tesla did not go unnoticed, and owners were really upset about it.
For trips that required multiple Supercharger stops, Tesla decided to implement a naming change, which did not show the city or state of each charging stop. Instead, it just showed the business where the Supercharger was located, giving many owners an unwelcome surprise.
However, Tesla’s Director of Supercharging, Max de Zegher, admitted the update was a “big mistake on our end,” and made a change that rolled out within 24 hours:
The naming change should have happened at once, instead of in 2 sequential steps. That was a big miss on our end. We do listen to the community and we do course-correct fast. The accelerated fix rolled out last night. The Tesla App is updated and most in-car touchscreens should…
— Max (@MdeZegher) November 20, 2025
The lack of a name for the city where a Supercharging stop would be made caused some confusion for owners in the short term. Some drivers argued that it was more difficult to make stops at some familiar locations that were special to them. Others were not too keen on not knowing where they were going to be along their trip.
Tesla was quick to scramble to resolve this issue, and it did a great job of rolling it out in an expedited manner, as de Zegher said that most in-car touch screens would notice the fix within one day of the change being rolled out.
Additionally, there will be even more improvements in December, as Tesla plans to show the common name/amenity below the site name as well, which will give people a better idea of what to expect when they arrive at a Supercharger.
News
Dutch regulator RDW confirms Tesla FSD February 2026 target
The regulator emphasized that safety, not public pressure, will decide whether FSD receives authorization for use in Europe.
The Dutch vehicle authority RDW responded to Tesla’s recent updates about its efforts to bring Full Self-Driving (Supervised) in Europe, confirming that February 2026 remains the target month for Tesla to demonstrate regulatory compliance.
While acknowledging the tentative schedule with Tesla, the regulator emphasized that safety, not public pressure, will decide whether FSD receives authorization for use in Europe.
RDW confirms 2026 target, warns Feb 2026 timeline is not guaranteed
In its response, which was posted on its official website, the RDW clarified that it does not disclose details about ongoing manufacturer applications due to competitive sensitivity. However, the agency confirmed that both parties have agreed on a February 2026 window during which Tesla is expected to show that FSD (Supervised) can meet required safety and compliance standards. Whether Tesla can satisfy those conditions within the timeline “remains to be seen,” RDW added.
RDW also directly addressed Tesla’s social media request encouraging drivers to contact the regulator to express support. While thanking those who already reached out, RDW asked the public to stop contacting them, noting these messages burden customer-service resources and have no influence on the approval process.
“In the message on X, Tesla calls on Tesla drivers to thank the RDW and to express their enthusiasm about this planning to us by contacting us. We thank everyone who has already done so, and would like to ask everyone not to contact us about this. It takes up unnecessary time for our customer service. Moreover, this will have no influence on whether or not the planning is met,” the RDW wrote.
The RDW shares insights on EU approval requirements
The RDW further outlined how new technology enters the European market when no existing legislation directly covers it. Under EU Regulation 2018/858, a manufacturer may seek an exemption for unregulated features such as advanced driver assistance systems. The process requires a Member State, in this case the Netherlands, to submit a formal request to the European Commission on the manufacturer’s behalf.
Approval then moves to a committee vote. A majority in favor would grant EU-wide authorization, allowing the technology across all Member States. If the vote fails, the exemption is valid only within the Netherlands, and individual countries must decide whether to accept it independently.
Before any exemption request can be filed, Tesla must complete a comprehensive type-approval process with the RDW, including controlled on-road testing. Provided that FSD Supervised passes these regulatory evaluations, the exemption could be submitted for broader EU consideration.