News
SpaceX spotted hot-fire testing Falcon 9 Block 5 ahead of its first reflight on August 7
Less than three months after SpaceX debuted its upgraded Falcon 9 Block 5 rocket, the company is set for an unexpectedly sudden inaugural reuse of the first highly reliable and reusable rocket to roll off of the Hawthorne, CA assembly line. Falcon 9 booster 1046 (B1046) is now targeting 1:18 AM EDT, August 7 for its second launch.
Confirmed by visual observation of a sooty Block 5 booster vertical on Cape Canaveral’s Pad 40, this reuse will be just two weeks away from beating SpaceX’s booster turnaround record of 72 days.
Static fire test of Falcon 9 complete—targeting August 7 launch of Merah Putih from Pad 40 in Florida.
— SpaceX (@SpaceX) August 2, 2018
On the ground to visually confirm plans for the historic reuse, Teslarati photographer Tom Cross also managed to capture an intriguing propellant loading and abort test, where SpaceX appeared to intentionally abort a ‘launch’ attempt after rapidly loading a full complement of liquid oxygen (LOX) and rocket-grade kerosene (RP-1).
While not 100% clear why this testing was done today, an extensive understanding of Falcon 9 Block 5’s behavior during propellant late-load and launch abort scenarios are both critical for the reliable operation of the upgraded rockets and invaluable for the first Crew Dragon launches later this year and early next, the latter with astronauts on board. With humans atop the rocket, a deep understanding of the vehicle’s behavior during a wide range of off-nominal scenarios is more critical than ever, be it required by NASA or simply a side effect of due diligence on behalf of SpaceX.
https://twitter.com/_TomCross_/status/1025074341040533504
A new era of reusable rockets
Regardless, the main focus of this mission is to launch a payload for Indonesian operator PT Telkom Indonesia, in this case a ~5800 kg (12800 lb) geostationary communications satellite known as Merah Putih (formerly Telkom 4). On the SpaceX side of things, this mission is absolutely critical for the company’s future – it will mark the (hopefully) successful inaugural reuse of a Falcon 9 Block 5 booster, the first of many dozens or even hundreds to come over the next several years if SpaceX’s can make good on its aspirations.
While not immensely impressive in the sense that B1046’s refurbishment took ~85 days to Block 4’s record 72-day turnaround, that cursory conclusion is far from accurate. The record turnaround with Block 4 booster B1045 was essentially the culmination of more than a year of experience with nearly a dozen Block 3 and Block 4 Falcon 9 reuses. While that experience definitely transferred in part to SpaceX’s first attempt at reusing Falcon 9 Block 5 (and especially so with the actual design of its reusability-focused upgrades), it’s worth noting that the first reuses of Falcon 9s averaged booster turnaround times of 180-250 days, nearly double or triple the time between Block 5’s first-ever launch and that same booster’s first reflight.
- Falcon 9 B1046 vents during a launch abort test just before its successful static fire, August 2nd. (Tom Cross)
- Drone ship OCISLY preps for its second Falcon 9 recovery in less than three weeks. (Tom Cross)
- A new vessel – GO Navigator – joined SpaceX’s fleet on July 31st, taking the place of fairing recovery stand-in GO Pursuit. (Tom Cross)
- Merah Putih (formerly Telkom 4) seen preparing for launch in Florida. (SSL)
Even still, B1046’s debut launch, landing, and refurbishment were wholly unique considering that SpaceX – according to Elon Musk – conducted an extensive “teardown” analysis of the pathfinder rocket after it was transported from the drone ship back to one of the company’s Cape Canaveral refurbishment facilities. It’s very likely the case that that teardown was one of the most extensive SpaceX has done with a recovered rocket, couched on the fact that the company’s future is wholly balanced on Falcon 9 Block 5’s success and ease/efficiency of reusability.

That critical teardown process likely took anywhere from 30-60 days, if not simply as long as needed to do it right, after which the rocket was fully reassembled and transported to SpaceX’s Launch Complex 40 (LC-40). Roughly eight days after it arrived at LC-40, B1046 rolled out to the pad’s launch mount, went vertical, and completed a series of tests (including static fire) on Thursday (8/2) afternoon. The static fire was confirmed by a few observers, while Tom Cross captured the first unequivocal proof that the rocket is sooty (and thus B1046).
This moment may seem small on the scale of SpaceX’s many towering achievements, but it will very likely become a fundamental keystone in the future history of affordable access to space.
prompt updates, on-the-ground perspectives, and unique glimpses of SpaceX’s rocket recovery fleet (including fairing catcher Mr Steven) check out our brand new LaunchPad and LandingZone newsletters!
News
SpaceX tells the FCC that Starship Flight 14 is going to orbit
SpaceX filed with the FCC for Starship Flight 14, its first true orbital launch attempt.
SpaceX has asked the Federal Communications Commission for permission to fly Starlink terminals during Starship’s fourteenth flight test, and the filing lays out a genuine trip to orbit, something the program has never attempted.
Every Starship flight so far, including Flight 13’s successful splashdown in the Indian Ocean on July 24, has flown a suborbital arc that ends with the ship reentering the atmosphere within the same hour it launches. The FCC paperwork describes a mission profile built around an actual orbital insertion instead.
The payload is the other half of the story. Flight 13 carried 20 production Starlink V3 satellites, but because that mission never reached orbit, the satellites reentered along with the ship rather than joining the constellation, something Teslarati covered in detail after SpaceX released footage shot from one of those satellites as it drifted away from Starship in space. Flight 14 is designed to close that gap. If the orbital insertion holds, the roughly 20 V3 satellites onboard would separate into an operational orbit and could eventually go into service, each one rated for about 1 terabit per second of downlink capacity by SpaceX’s own account.
SpaceX announces new Starbase for ‘thousands of Starship launches annually’
Elon Musk first flagged the orbital attempt during SpaceX’s August 4 earnings call, the company’s first as a public entity following its June IPO under the ticker SPCX. He also floated catching the ship with the Starbase tower on the same flight, an idea he walked back on August 20, saying the catch attempt would more likely come “in a few months,” as Teslarati reported at the time. Flight 14 will instead target a splashdown for the ship in the Indian Ocean, the same recovery method used since Flight 12.
Hardware has been catching up to the ambition. Booster 21 completed a full 33-engine static fire on August 28, and Ship 41 finished its own six-engine test the week before. An airspace briefing circulated to pilots on August 20 listed September 15 as the target date, later than the end of August window Musk mentioned on the earnings call, though SpaceX has not confirmed a launch date publicly and Starship schedules routinely slip while hardware and FAA paperwork line up.
The FCC filing itself does not guarantee a launch date. It covers communications authority, and not flight readiness, considering SpaceX still needs Ship 41 fully stacked and cleared by the FAA before Flight 14 can fly. But the filing is a real marker of intent and it puts a specific regulatory process behind what had so far only been Musk’s word on the earnings call.
News
Tesla Cybercab Event: what to expect from Austin
Tesla is set to launch Cybercab on Thursday at an event in Austin, Texas, which will officially bring the company’s first steering wheel-less and pedal-less vehicle to a limited number of consumers for the first time.
The event, which is invite-only, is still thin on details: we’ll be there, and it seems the event will be held at Gigafactory Texas, but the launch of this vehicle truly relies on it being operational outside of the factory and on public roads.
🚨 Close-Up look at Tesla Cybercab without steering wheel: pic.twitter.com/9TXCDeDCz7
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 3, 2026
Nevertheless, there are some big things to expect, and other things to temper expectations on. For what it’s worth, we believe this event could be perhaps the biggest indication that Tesla is ready to truly enter a new phase and chapter in its historic story.
Tesla Cybercab’s First Foray into the Public with Real-World Riders
Cybercab will likely hit the streets of Austin and the surrounding areas, likely in the established geofence that Tesla has expanded on for the past 14 months. Just yesterday, Tesla expanded it once again by 9 percent.
Tesla will put, for the first time, a vehicle without any manual controls on public roads, likely without any help from teleoperators. This is a truly groundbreaking development if it comes through in this fashion: it would be groundbreaking for Tesla to roll out a truly driverless ride-hailing vehicle.
Cybercab Has Already Been Unveiled
This is not an unveiling event. Cybercab has been released for nearly two years, as Tesla first showed it to the public on October 10, 2024.
FIRST LOOK: Tesla ‘Cybercab’ Robotaxi makes its global debut
While there is some small speculation that Tesla could release the Roadster at the event as a surprise, it seems more likely the focus will be on the Cybercab and the huge accomplishment that will come with releasing a vehicle with no manual controls.
There Will Be a Lot of Hype
What’s important to remember about the Cybercab event is that Tesla will continue to prioritize safety and the rollout will likely be slow, just as it has been with Robotaxi.
One of the biggest complaints about Robotaxi is vehicle population, and the fact that the wait for a ride, at least in some instances, has been longer than most want to admit.
It will take time for this project to truly scale. It will take time for Tesla to roll this out in a large fashion. The important thing to note is that they are doing it, and they’re doing it with a vehicle that is completely engineered and built internally. That’s something no other ride-hailing service can say.
Elon Musk
SpaceX would not exist if this crucial early launch failed, Musk says
Elon Musk recently restated a fact that still defines SpaceX’s origin story: if Falcon 1’s fourth launch had failed, the company would not exist. The comment answered a reminder that after three consecutive losses, SpaceX had money for only one more attempt.
On X, Peter Diamandis said that the present-day acknowledgement of SpaceX’s success does not discount the rough start the company had. “Almost nobody remembers that Elon’s first rocket failed three times, and there was money for exactly only one more attempt.”
Musk said, “If the 4th launch had failed, SpaceX would not exist.”
If the 4th launch had failed, SpaceX would not exist
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) August 30, 2026
In late 2008, the firm was nearly out of cash. Another failure would have ended payroll, closed the Hawthorne factory, and left the Falcon 9 and Dragon programs as unfinished drawings.
The first flight lifted off from Omelek Island on 24 March 2006. Thirty-three seconds later, a corroded aluminum fitting on a fuel line leaked. Kerosene ignited around the Merlin engine, control was lost, and the vehicle came apart. The small DARPA payload, FalconSAT-2, survived the short flight only to land on a storage shed near the pad. Investigators later traced the fitting to a materials mix-up that should never have reached the rocket.
Flight 2, on 21 March 2007, looked far better at first. The first stage burned cleanly and handed off to the Kestrel-powered upper stage. The vehicle crossed 100 kilometers and reached a peak of about 289 kilometers. Then propellant slosh in the second-stage tank started a circular coning motion that grew until the engine shut down. Telemetry faded as the stage tumbled, and SpaceX had reached space but not orbit. Over the next year, the team redesigned everything from the ground up, including tanks, baffles, and the new regeneratively cooled Merlin 1C.
That engine flew on Flight 3 on 2 August 2008. The first stage performed almost perfectly and reached 217 kilometers. After main-engine cutoff, leftover fuel in the cooling channels produced a faint residual thrust, roughly 10 pounds per square inch of chamber pressure. On a Texas test stand, the effect was invisible beneath ambient air pressure. In vacuum it was enough to push the spent first stage back into the second stage after separation. The stages collided, the upper stage spun, and the mission was lost. Musk later said a slightly longer delay before staging would have saved the flight.
Six weeks later, the team assembled Flight 4 from remaining parts and flew it on 28 September 2008 at 23:15 UTC. The payload was Ratsat, a 165-kilogram aluminum mass simulator built in-house. Staging was delayed so residual thrust could decay. The Kestrel ignited, the fairing split away, and nine and a half minutes after liftoff the vehicle was in orbit. After a coast, the second stage restarted, settling into a 621-by-643-kilometer path at 9.35 degrees inclination. Falcon 1 became the first privately developed liquid-fueled rocket to reach Earth orbit. Musk called the insertion “middle of the bull’s-eye.”
SpaceX restores a Falcon 1 rocket for 10th anniversary of first launch success
That success unlocked NASA’s Commercial Resupply Services award later that year. Without it, there would have been no Falcon 9, no reusable first stages, and no Dragon cargo or crew flights to the International Space Station. Launch prices would have remained far higher. Starlink’s constellation would not exist; broadband from low Earth orbit would still be a paper concept.
Ride-share markets, high launch cadence, and the current pace of lunar and Mars hardware would be years behind. Communications, Earth observation, and the cost of putting anything into space would look more like the 2000s than the 2020s.
One extra second of residual thrust in August 2008 would have written a different decade.



