News
SpaceX adds mystery Falcon 9 launch to packed October manifest
SpaceX FCC paperwork has revealed the addition of an unidentified Falcon 9 launch to the company’s packed October manifest, ranging from several Starlink missions to Crew Dragon’s first operational astronaut launch.
Under the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC), companies must submit an application for permission to communicate with their rocket for every single launch. While a major annoyance for those companies and an undeniably clunky process, those applications for “special temporary authority” (STAs) to communicate are one of the only ways members of the public can independently monitor and forecast US launch activities. For SpaceX, the company typically applies for multiple STAs for every single launch, including specific applications for booster launches, landings, and preflight ground tests.
The separate STAs can be connected with a “Mission Number” SpaceX associates each one with, while coordinates included to designate the area of landing communications (i.e. the drone ship recovery zone) often reveals a mission’s trajectory. Combined, STAs can often be used to identify the exact mission (i.e. a Starlink launch, Crew Dragon, etc.). STAs for SpaceX’s upcoming Crew Dragon Crew-1 and Cargo Dragon CRS-21 missions, as well as several Starlink launches, have already been identified.
Thanks to bad weather and a flurry of ULA delays, SpaceX’s October manifest is currently packed with three Starlink missions, a GPS III satellite launch for the US military, and Crew Dragon’s first operational astronaut mission to the International Space Station (ISS). Barring a miracle, ULA’s latest Delta IV Heavy launch delay has pushed SpaceX’s GPS III SV04 mission to October 1st.
Starlink-12 – SpaceX’s 11th Starlink mission this year and 13th overall – is tentatively set to follow GPS III SV04 at 9:17 am EDT (13:17 UTC) on October 1st. Starlink-13 and Starlink-14 are then scheduled to launch no earlier than mid-to-late-October. Finally, SpaceX and NASA are in the final stages of preparing for Crew Dragon’s Crew-1 mission – the spacecraft’s first operational delivery of astronauts to the ISS – as soon as October 31st (Halloween).
A new Sirius XM radio satellite (SXM-7) could launch on a Falcon 9 rocket on November 6th. On the West Coast, SpaceX’s first California mission since June 2019 could launch on November 10th. SpaceX and NASA are also targeting the launch debut of an upgraded Cargo Dragon 2 resupply spacecraft on a mission known as CRS-21, scheduled to lift off NET November 15th. Last but assuredly not least, Turkey’s Turksat 5A communications satellite could launch as early as November 31st. No Starlink missions are currently scheduled in November but it’s safe to assume that there will be at least one or two. Altogether, SpaceX already has five launches scheduled in October and four set for November. While undeniably prolific, SpaceX has never launched more than three times in one month.
Now, on top of that swath of firm launches, mysterious “SpaceX Mission 1512” has joined the fray. Based on the FCC STA request, the mission is scheduled to launch no earlier than (NET) October 3rd (with a six-month window) and will include a return-to-launch-site (RTLS) Falcon 9 booster landing. The RTLS landing in particular substantially constrains the mission and means – right off the bat – that it can’t be for Starlink, while also ruling out Cargo Dragon CRS-21 (an RTLS landing STA already exists) and Crew Dragon Crew-1 (drone ship landing). Simply put, an RTLS rules out every other launch on SpaceX’s 2020 manifest beyond a rideshare mission tentatively scheduled in December, and SpaceX almost never files for STAs months in advance.
That leaves some kind of unannounced, mystery mission. Only once in SpaceX’s history has the company conducted an unannounced launch – unsurprisingly for some unknown branch of the US military or espionage apparatus. Known as Zuma and still shrouded in secrecy, it followed an almost identical pattern, revealed only through FCC launch and landing communications requests and rumors in 2017 before a January 2018 launch. Although Northrop Grumman was thrown under the bus for a failed payload adapter that may or may not have doomed the satellite, no federal agency has taken credit for the mission – unspeakably odd as far as spaceflight goes.
At the time, unofficial rumors published on Reddit implied that Zuma would only be the first of many similar missions. The claimed failure of a spring-like deployment mechanism and loss of spacecraft – believed to be worth one or several billion dollars – just hours after launch would have unsurprisingly thrown a wrench into those gears. Now, almost three years later and in the midst of an exceptionally busy period of several important launches, could SpaceX be preparing for Zuma-2?
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
A Tesla Semi caught fire in Hayward, California, which caused both directions of traffic to shut down for hours before being completely reopened early on Wednesday, the California Highway Patrol said.
The fire occurred just after 5:30 local time in Hayward on Tuesday, as the Semi caught fire in the southbound lanes of I-880 before CHP officials made the decision to shut down both lanes of traffic due to potential risks from hazardous chemical smoke.
There were no injuries reported.
🚨 A Tesla Semi reportedly caught fire, with California Highway Patrol confirming. The Semi was on I-880 SB
An estimated 5,000 to 7,000 semi-truck and large commercial vehicle fires occur on U.S. roadways every year
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 28, 2026
The cause of the fire is currently unknown, as neither Tesla nor the CHP have not determined a cause.
However, some images taken before the Semi was completely destroyed by the fire seem to indicate this might have been an older unit, as it appears to be one of the designs that Tesla shipped as part of its pilot program, before revising it and starting mass production just a month ago.
@Tslachan From on of the videos looks like it’s an old Semi (not the refresh version that recently started production) https://t.co/KzwmR2kXow
— Area Under The Curve 🎗️ (@AreaUnderCurve) October 28, 2026
At the time of publication, CHP had not returned our request for a comment for additional details, including the Semi involved and any potential collaboration on an investigation between the CHP and Tesla. We will update this story when we hear back from them.
The southbound lanes were reopened at 3:30 a.m. on Wednesday, with the northbound lanes opening last night a few hours after the fire began. The CHP did state that the lithium batteries were “incredibly difficult to extinguish,” according to NBC Bay Area.
The truck’s driver said that the Semi caught fire, but he did not have an explanation.
An estimated 5,000 to 7,000 semi-truck and large commercial vehicle fires occur on U.S. roadways every year.
Tesla’s launch of the “Emergency Drive Away” function a few months back offered owners a safe option to evacuate an area if they were in reasonable danger. The function finally got its first use in the real world, but it appears it was by mistake.
A video shared by u/Joshalander in the r/TeslaLounge subreddit recorded the instance from his vehicle and said the incident took place in Austin this past weekend during the city’s F1 Race.
“Was charging around 6 AM this past Sunday in Austin before heading to the F1 race and heard a pop. Looked over and saw the new emergency drive-away feature in action. Genuinely felt bad for the dude when he got out and realized what happened, since he looked exhausted and only seemed to half-read the prompts.”
🚨 Here’s the first look at Tesla’s Emergency Drive Away function in action:
Apparently this driver accidentally enabled it and drove forward; you can see the Supercharger pull with the car.
Tesla said previously this would cost up to $25k if not used properly. https://t.co/B4qQRrsO6B
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 28, 2026
Emergency Drive Away unlatches the Supercharger connector from the vehicle, but still causes damage to both the car and the Supercharger. Tesla has said that it will cost up to $25,000 in repairs to have everything fixed back to normal.
Additionally, the company said that if it were not used in an emergency situation, the driver of the vehicle who activated the Emergency Drive Away feature would be responsible for all repair costs.
Tesla constitutes the following situations as reasonable justifications for activating the feature:
- You face an immediate threat to your life or personal safety.
- You must leave the area immediately.
- Exiting the vehicle is unsafe.
- Unplugging the charge connector would unreasonably delay your departure or expose you to a risk to your personal safety.
After using the feature, Tesla requires the driver to schedule Service so the car can be inspected.
News
Tesla’s Cybercab battery design could make robotaxis even cheaper
Tesla built the Cybercab’s battery pack with spare room for a future switch to LFP.
Tesla built the Cybercab’s battery pack with empty space inside it on purpose, and the reason points to a cheaper robotaxi down the road.
Robert Sumpf, Tesla’s director of mechanical design engineering for battery modules and packs, said the extra room beside and beneath the Cybercab’s modules was left there so the company can move to lithium iron phosphate cells later. “So, we protected this pack to go to an even lower energy dense chemistry as we scale and need to bring LFP into the platform,” Sumpf said in a Cybercab deep dive with Munro Live.
The Cybercab runs on Tesla’s own 4680 cells with a nickel chemistry today. LFP cells store less energy for their size, so a straight swap would cut range. The reserved space lets Tesla add more LFP cells to make up the difference. In return, Tesla would get cells that cost less, run cooler and survive more charge cycles. LFP became the most used EV battery chemistry in the world last year.
Not all of that room was planned for a chemistry change. Lars Moravy, Tesla’s Vice President of Vehicle Engineering, said part of it exists because “we didn’t need as many batteries as we thought we did.” Tesla told Sandy Munro in early 2025 that it was targeting a Cybercab pack under 50 kWh with close to 300 miles of range.
The pack also breaks from the structural design Tesla used in some Model Y and Cybertruck builds. Instead of potting hundreds of cells into one block, the Cybercab uses four separate, individually sealed modules, so a bad module can be replaced without scrapping the whole pack. Sumpf was blunt about the older approach, giving the Model Y structural battery “a grade D” because it was hard to build and nearly impossible to repair. He estimated a fully structural pack gains about 10% more cell volume, but said “the issue is the service cost.”
That cost matters more for a car that rarely sits parked. Cybercab chief engineer Eric Earley said replacing an entire pack “before half a million miles is a killer on cost,” which is why remanufacturing and serviceability were built into the design from the start.
The same Munro Live tour produced Moravy’s admission that the Cybercab line at Giga Texas is now outpacing Robotaxi deployments, along with a look at the robotaxi’s unorthodox paint process. Tesla is aiming to deliver the first Cybercabs to outside customers by the end of 2026, though Elon Musk has said the vast majority will stay owned by Tesla and run as a transport service.
Sumpf did not give a date for an LFP version, name a cell supplier or say how a chemistry change would affect range. For now, the 4680 cars keep piling up: Texas DMV records from Tuesday list 544 Cybercabs authorized for Tesla’s Robotaxi fleet, more than the 507 Model Ys on the same roster for the first time.
Tesla Semi catches fire in California: what we know
Tesla’s ‘Emergency Drive Away’ function gets its first use in the real world
