News
SpaceX set to launch its first previously-flown Block 5 rocket tonight
At the same time as SpaceX is readying its first Falcon 9 Block 5 booster reuse, the company’s second flight-proven Block 5 launch is already fast approaching and could be a strong contender to beat the company’s record of 72 days between launches of the same rocket.
A critical milestone for Falcon 9 Block 5
Formerly known as Telkom 4, SpaceX’s 1:18 AM EDT August 7th launch of the Merah Putih (Red and White in Indonesian) communications satellite will place the 5800 kg (12,800 lb) craft into a high-energy geostationary transfer orbit and will become the second heaviest GTO launch completed by SpaceX while still recovering the Falcon 9 booster. More importantly, however, Telkom 4 will also mark a critical milestone for Falcon 9 as the first reuse of a Block 5 booster.
https://twitter.com/_TomCross_/status/1025074341040533504
Designed to be many times more reusable and reliable than the already impressive Falcon 9 Full Thrust iterations preceding it, pathfinder booster B1046 could be capable of flying anywhere from 5, 10, or even 100 launches over the course of its flightworthy lifespan. It very well may require some considerable refinements to approach the true goal of orbital Falcon 9 launches with zero refurbishments between flights. CEO Elon Musk discussed those aspirations just before Block 5’s launch debut on May 11:
“We need to basically take the rocket from its landing pad, rotate it horizontal, stow the legs. Take it to the launch pad, attach an upper stage, attach a fairing with a payload. Then transport it out the launch pad, rotate it vertically, load propellant, and fly. And in principle, that is literally all that’s necessary.” – Elon Musk
This is understandably SpaceX’s goal, and it’s unlikely to happen just a few months after Block 5’s debut. Nevertheless, SpaceX appears to be already pushing the envelope of what they’ve previously accomplished with reusable Falcon 9s.
-
- B1046 lifts off for the first time on May 4th, 2018. (Teslarati)
-
- Falcon 9 B1046 returned to Port Canaveral aboard drone ship OCISLY on May 15. It will launch for the second time on August 4. (Tom Cross)
-
- Soon after, B1046 was spotted on its way to a refurbishment facility around a week after its May 11 launch debut. (Instagram /u/tersco)
Breaking records four months after launch debut
While B1046 is tracking towards a booster turnaround of roughly 92 days, compared with the current Block 4 booster record of 72 days, it’s worth noting that more than a majority of that time was likely spent in a state of unique analysis for the inaugural Block 5 rocket, involving extensive disassembly. As stated by Musk, “we need to take [B1046] apart to confirm that it does not need to be taken apart.” He also expected that teardown analysis to be “very rigorous”, indicating that B1046 probably deserves the crown for booster turnaround so long as one only accounts for time spent in transport and undergoing refurbishment.
Still, winning by a technicality is never any fun. On that note, SpaceX appears to be tracking towards a true record-breaking rocket reuse, potentially as few as 40 days between launches. Not one to let its other launch facilities be left out, this record-breaking turnaround attempt will occur on the West Coast with Falcon 9 B1048, the recovery of which has been extensively documented by Teslarati photographer Pauline Acalin over the last two weeks. NASASpaceflight.com confirmed that SpaceX intends to reuse B1048 for this mission for the NET mid-September launch and the record ~50 days between flights could help explain an unusually extensive and lengthy analysis of the rocket after it was lifted off drone ship Just Read The Instructions and placed on its dockside recovery stand.
-
- B1047 before the launch of Telstar 19V. (Tom Cross)
-
- Sooty B1047 arrives at Pad 39A’s horizontal integration facility (HIF), July 31st. (Reddit – Kent767)
-
- Falcon 9 B1048 ahead of its launch debut, July 25th. (Pauline Acalin)
-
- After a successful launch and landing, B1048 stands tall in Port of San Pedro before being lowered and transported for its next launch. (Pauline Acalin)
After 10 days of recovery operations and analysis, B1048 was transported to SpaceX’s Hawthorne factory on August 6th, where it will presumably undergo refurbishment in preparation for its next launch. If B1046 and B1048 are representative samples of SpaceX’s growing rocket fleet, their stunningly quick turnarounds (especially for a largely new rocket that debuted less than 3-4 months prior) are likely a sign of things to come as SpaceX gets a handle on the real-world capabilities of its robust Block 5 upgrade.
It’s entirely possible that every Block 5 reuse to come can and will break the previous launch turnaround record, at least up to the point that SpaceX demonstrates a true 24-hour turnaround sometime next year. Stay tuned…
For 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!
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.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
