News
SpaceX might launch first Starlink Gen2 satellites next week
Update: It no longer appears that SpaceX’s last Starlink launch of the year will carry true V2 or V2 Mini satellite prototypes for its next-generation Starlink constellation. That has only deepened the layers of mystery surrounding the mission.
SpaceX has told the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) that it plans to begin launching its first next-generation Starlink Gen2 satellites before the end of 2022.
The FCC only just granted SpaceX partial approval of its Starlink Gen2 constellation, which has been under review since May 2020, in late November 2022. Just a week or two later, in several filings asking the FCC to expedite Special Temporary Authority (STA) requests that would allow it to fully test and communicate with its first next-generation satellite prototypes, SpaceX said [PDF] that it “anticipates that it will begin launching Gen2 satellites before the end of December 2022.”
The update that's rolling out to the fleet makes full use of the front and rear steering travel to minimize turning circle. In this case a reduction of 1.6 feet just over the air— Wes (@wmorrill3) April 16, 2024
In most of the main STA requests filed in early December, SpaceX appears to be asking the FCC to add Starlink Gen2 satellites as approved points of communication for user terminals and ground stations that are already licensed. Those include its new high-performance dishes, newer base-model dishes (both fixed and in motion), and first-generation (round) dishes. While the FCC’s recent actions on Starlink do not raise confidence in its consistency, objectivity, and rationality, these requests should be shoe-ins.
SpaceX also wants permission to activate Very High Frequency (VHF) beacons that are meant to be installed on all Starlink Gen2 satellites. Those beacons would serve as a backup to existing telemetry, tracking, and command (TT&C) antennas and decrease the odds of a total loss of control by ensuring that SpaceX can remain in contact with Gen2 satellites regardless of their orientation – an ability that would obviously improve the safety of Starlink orbital operations.
Given how unusually long it took the FCC to review SpaceX’s Starlink Gen2 applications and how arbitrarily strict it was with its partial Gen2 license grant, it’s hard to say if the FCC will grant these STA requests or how long it will take if it does. SpaceX finds itself in a strange position where the FCC has given it permission to begin launching up to 7500 Starlink Gen2 satellites, but has not granted SpaceX permission to use those satellites to communicate with user terminals.
To the FCC’s credit, a constellation operator has never been ready to launch satellites less than one month after launches were approved, and it’s likely that the processes to ensure those satellites can be properly used after launch are ongoing. Additionally, because of the FCC’s arbitrary license restrictions, SpaceX is not allowed to launch or operate any Starlink Gen2 satellites outside of a narrow range of altitudes (475-580 km). After launch, Starlink Gen2 satellites will likely take around two or three months to reach those operational orbits, only after which can SpaceX begin using them in earnest. As long as the FCC approves most of SpaceX’s December 2022 STA requests, the disruption to Starlink Gen2 deployment and on-orbit testing should thus be limited.
Next week?
While SpaceX’s schedule targets can often be easily dismissed for future projects, there is evidence that SpaceX will actually attempt to launch the first Starlink Gen2 satellites before the end of the year. Earlier this month, SpaceX received permission to communicate with a Falcon 9 rocket for a mission called Starlink 5-1. One of five orbital ‘shells’ that make up SpaceX’s first-generation Starlink constellation does technically have zero satellites and is awaiting its first launch. But that shell (Group 5) is polar, meaning that its satellites will orbit around Earth’s poles, and the STA license the FCC granted indicates that this launch will be to a more equatorial inclination, which would not make sense for a Group 5 launch.
It’s thus possible that SpaceX decided to repurpose the STA for its first Starlink Gen2 launch, which the company cannot currently launch to an inclination other than 53 degrees – roughly the same trajectory indicated by the document. Starlink Gen1 has two 53-degree shells, Group 1 and Group 4, and both are nearly complete and would likely be called Starlink 1-XX or 4-XX in FCC filings. Combined with SpaceX stating in its VHF beacon STA request that initial Starlink Gen2 launches will start in “late December 2022,” and unofficial manifests indicating that SpaceX has a Starlink launch scheduled as early as December 28th, it certainly appears that first Gen2 satellites will reach orbit later this year.
More likely than not, they will be Starlink “V2 Mini” satellites – a downsized variant created to maximize the efficiency of Falcon 9 Starlink Gen2/V2 launches while SpaceX’s next-generation Starship rocket remains stuck on the ground. The Starship-optimized Starlink V2 satellites SpaceX initially hoped would be the only version reportedly weigh about 1.25 tons (~2750 lb) and measure roughly 6.5 by 2.7 meters (21 x 9 ft). According to an October 2022 FCC filing, Starlink V2 Mini satellites will still be several times larger than today’s Starlink V1.5 satellites, weighing up to 800 kilograms (~1750 lb) and measuring 4.1 by 2.7 meters (13.5 x 9 ft).
SpaceX says Starlink V2 Mini satellites will also have a pair of massive solar arrays with a total array of 120 square meters (~1300 sq ft). Assuming V2 Mini satellites are roughly as power-efficient as V1.5 satellites and use similarly efficient solar arrays, that indicates that could offer around 3-4 times more usable bandwidth per satellite. Assuming SpaceX has again found a way to use all of Falcon 9’s available performance, each rocket should be able to carry up to 21 Starlink V2 Mini satellites to low Earth orbit.
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
