News
SpaceX bids goodbye to older Falcon 9s with Florida ‘jellyfish’ launch spectacle
SpaceX’s final Block 4 Falcon 9 has completed its second and last orbital mission with a spectacular sendoff visible for hundreds of miles along the East Coast, harkening back to “alien invasion” comparisons that followed an equally stunning SpaceX launch from California last December.
Although the Falcon 9 booster was expended in the Atlantic Ocean minutes after launch, its upper stage remains in orbit in an experimental test of its lifespan, while the mission’s flight-proven Cargo Dragon spacecraft separated from the rocket and headed to the International Space Station with a promise of a possible third orbital reuse in 2019. This mission’s Dragon capsule flew for the first time in late 2016 for the CRS-9 mission and spent the two years since then having its heat shield and other major components refurbished or replaced, likely at a cost to SpaceX less than half that of constructing a brand-new Dragon spacecraft.
Falcon 9 B1045 lounges in the Florida summer humidity, hours before its second and final launch. (Tom Cross)
According to Jessica Jensen, SpaceX’s Director of Dragon Mission Management, SpaceX’s Dragon refurbishment team has also gotten considerably more efficient over several years of experience reusing the orbital spacecraft, now up to three reflights of three separate capsules. She noted in the postlaunch conference that – if all major components are healthy upon CRS-15’s early-August return to Earth – this capsule could be refurbished for its third mission in as few as months, which would make it one of the last Dragon 1 launches before the upgraded Dragon 2 begins crewed flights and takes over all cargo missions. After CRS-15, five more of those Cargo Dragon flights remain until CRS-2’s 2020 takeover, all of which will utilize flight-proven capsules.
-
- CRS-15’s dramatic pre-dawn launch. (Tom Cross)
-
- The extraordinary plume was lit up by the sun before it had risen above the Eastern horizon. (Tom Cross)
Falcon 9, on the other hand, reached a truly historic milestone today for SpaceX – B1045’s second and final flight marks the last rocket SpaceX will fly that does not feature a number of upgrades designed to dramatically improve booster reusability. Known as Falcon 9 Block 5, all future SpaceX missions (at least until BFR’s debut sometime in the early 2020s) will be launched aboard the upgraded rocket. If it works as intended, Block 5 should theoretically enable a rapid and affordable level of reusability never before achieved by Falcon 9 or any other rocket, for that matter.
https://twitter.com/_TomCross_/status/1012694524987092992
While still more than a little disheartening to see a Falcon 9 booster intentionally expended after launch, the spectacle created by B1045’s final flight was fitting, to say the least. Thankfully, the Block 5 takeover of all future SpaceX Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launches is likely to also result in a dramatic reduction in SpaceX’s willingness to expend flight-proven rockets after launch. Whereas Block 3 and 4 Falcon 9s were never designed to affordably and safely fly more than two or three times total, minimizing any opportunity cost from expending twice-flown rockets after launch, Block 5 has been purpose-built to allow individual boosters to fly a bare minimum of 10 times with minimal refurbishment and as many as 100 times with regular maintenance. Unless Block 5’s design fails to achieve that level of reusability, SpaceX is extremely unlikely to expend Block 5 boosters unless they have flown a number of times to extract as much value as possible from them.
Up next on SpaceX’s manifest are two back-to-back Falcon 9 Block 5 launches, Iridium-7 from California on July 20 and Telstar 19V from Florida less than 18 hours later. Both Block 5 boosters will be recovered aboard SpaceX’s fleet of drone ships, Just Read The Instructions (JRTI) to the West and Of Course I Still Love You (OCISLY) to the East.
Follow us for live updates, peeks behind the scenes, and photos from Teslarati’s East and West Coast photographers.
Teslarati – Instagram – Twitter
Tom Cross – Twitter
Pauline Acalin – Twitter
Eric Ralph – Twitter
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
