News
SpaceX hints at mystery Falcon 9 missions with record breaking launch target
Speaking at the 2019 Smallsat Symposium, SpaceX Vice President of Commercial Sales Jonathan Hofeller announced that the company will try to break the launch record it set last year in 2019. That record stands at 21 successful missions, while President and COO Gwynne Shotwell stated in a May 2018 interview that she was anticipating 24-28 launches in 2018 and ~18 in 2019.
Ranging from Crew Dragon transporting astronauts and a duo of Falcon Heavy missions to perhaps ten commercial satellite launches, 2019 will undoubtedly be full of major events for SpaceX. However, SpaceX’s publicly-available launch manifest suggests that there will be no more than 18 government and commercial missions ready for the company to place in orbit before 2019 is out, implying that Hofeller may be hinting at launches that are not yet public.
Last May, SpaceX Prez Gwynne Shotwell was projecting 24 to 28 launches for 2018 but more like 18 for 2019. 21+ may be an “aspirational goal,” unless they’re counting Starship Hopper: https://t.co/RDbdPLA2Z7
— Alan Boyle (@b0yle) February 7, 2019
In just the last two years (24 months), SpaceX has successfully launched Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy an astounding 40 times, averaging approximately one launch every 2.5 weeks. In 2017, SpaceX demolished its own prior cadence record with 18 launches, a record the company’s exceptional workforce summarily proceeded to beat in 2018 with 21 successful missions launched. A vast majority of those 40 missions (27 to be precise) were the result of competitive, commercial contracts that SpaceX has been extremely successful at winning, thanks largely to the nearly unbeatable pricing of Falcon 9 and Heavy.
Much like most other launch providers, SpaceX plays its manifest extremely close to the chest, rarely revealing more than a blanket status update. For example, SpaceX’s website states that it has “has secured over 100 missions to its manifest, representing over $12 billion on contract.” Thanks to the general drought of official manifest information, the closest approximation to a real SpaceX manifest has traditionally been maintained by members of spaceflight fan communities like /r/SpaceX and NASASpaceflight.com, using the best aspects of organized crowdsourcing to create an extremely reliable snapshot of launch contracts scheduled within ~24 months.
However, compared to SpaceX’s claimed manifest of 100+ missions at an average cost per launch of ~$120M (twice Falcon 9’s $62M list price), crowdsourced SpaceX manifests – based on mostly public information – show fewer than 60 possible launch contracts between now and the end of 2024, a majority of which are for the US government (Crew and Cargo Dragon, Air Force GPS launches, and a few NASA spacecraft). Given SpaceX’s confident use of “secured” and “on contract”, the massive gap between public manifests and SpaceX’s claims leaves more than 40 launches almost completely in the dark.
-
- Falcon 9 B1046 lifts off for the third time with Spaceflight’s SSO-A rideshare mission. (Pauline Acalin)
-
- Falcon 9 B1047 lifts off from Pad 39A, November 2018. (Tom Cross)
-
- Falcon 9 B1048 appears out of the fog prior to its second orbital-class launch. (Pauline Acalin)
-
- Falcon 9 B1050 is seen here just after liftoff. GPS III SV01’s Falcon 9 will feature no grid fins or landing legs. ☹ (Tom Cross)
A Big Falcon Mystery
Hofeller’s Feb. 6th comment is thus just a tiny taste of SpaceX’s potential mystery manifest, indicating that the company has more than 21 payloads to launch in 2019 while public info reveals no more than 17-18 likely to be ready. Where, then, might Hofeller find an extra 4-5 missions that public observers would not normally be aware of?
The simplest answer least reminiscent of a conspiracy theory is Starlink, SpaceX’s global constellation of at least 4425 satellites. While it would be an extraordinary achievement, Reuters reported in October 2018 that CEO Elon Musk had gone as far as firing multiple senior managers of the young satellite program to install new managers with a singleminded goal: begin launching operational Starlink satellites by mid-2019. A little over six months after Musk’s Starlink shake-up, SpaceX has pivoted towards rapidly building and launching around ~1500 first-generation satellites with more conservative capabilities to lower orbits relative to the original Starlink specification.
-
- One of the first two prototype Starlink satellites separates from Falcon 9’s upper stage, February 2018. (SpaceX)
-
- SpaceX’s first two Starlink prototype satellites are pictured here before their inaugural Feb. 2018 launch, showing off a utilitarian design. (SpaceX)
SpaceX also received a major Starlink contract from the US Air Force Research Laboratory worth almost $29 million, $19.1M of which was dispersed to SpaceX in October 2018. As of late 2018, the company’s Starlink branch had already pivoted toward ramping up production of the first several batches of operational Starlink satellites. According to a number of employees, SpaceX’s first two Starlink prototype satellites – known as Tintin A and B – were a programmatic success and continue to operate in orbit today after proving out a number of critical Starlink technologies. As such, it’s not out of the question for operational Starlink launches to begin as early as mid-2019, although Musk’s aggressive schedule is likely more than a little overly optimistic.
Assuming Starlink is greeted with a perfect production ramp and the first 10-20 spacecraft make it to orbit in good health by June 2019, it’s at least not inconceivable that a second and third launch could follow, perhaps with a 3-month launch cadence (June/September/December). The chances of this happening are probably about as slim as they come, but it does offer one possible way for SpaceX’s apparent ~18-launch manifest to jump up to 21 or more missions. The next most probable route to 21+ launches involves at least one or two Starlink-specific launches, followed by another one or two launches for a secretive US government customer like the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO).
The top secret Zuma spacecraft could be alive and well doing exactly what it was intended to: https://t.co/bK6x38KyIL
— Tyler Rogoway (@Aviation_Intel) January 12, 2018
In January 2018, SpaceX successfully launched a spacecraft called Zuma with no known customer aside from a generic US military agency. Despite an ambiguous potential failure of the satellite – attributed to a Northrop Grumman deployment mechanism – just days after launch, a variety of anonymous sources indicated that Zuma was just the first in a series of new military satellites with a focus on SpaceX as the primary launch provider. The value of the intensely-secretive program was estimated to be in the billions of dollars, implying a veritable constellation of mystery satellites that could provide SpaceX several additional launch contracts.
Now a little over 12 months distant from Zuma’s bizarre debut, it’s conceivable that the next phase of the secretive satellite program is scheduled sometime in 2019. Ultimately, the general public is unlikely to learn about any potential mystery SpaceX launches until they are imminent, barring comments from executives or sourced leaks making their way into the news. For now, we wait.
Check out Teslarati’s newsletters for prompt updates, on-the-ground perspectives, and unique glimpses of SpaceX’s rocket launch and recovery processes!
Elon Musk
Tesla Semi’s official battery capacity leaked by California regulators
A California regulatory filing just confirmed the exact battery size inside each Tesla Semi variant.
A regulatory filing published by the California Air Resources Board in April 2026 has put official numbers on what Tesla Semi owners and fleet buyers have long wanted confirmed: the exact battery capacities of both the Long Range and Standard Range Semi truck variants. CARB is California’s independent air quality regulator, and it certifies zero-emission powertrains before they can be sold or operated in the state. When a manufacturer submits a vehicle for certification, the resulting executive order becomes a public document, making it one of the most reliable sources for confirmed production specs on any EV.
The document lists two certified powertrain configurations. The Long Range Semi carries a usable battery capacity of 822 kWh, while the Standard Range version comes in at 548 kWh. Both use lithium-ion NCMA chemistry and share the same peak and steady-state motor output ratings of 800 kW and 525 kW respectively. Cross-referencing Tesla’s published efficiency figure of approximately 1.7 kWh per mile under full load, the 822 kWh pack supports roughly 480 miles of real-world range, which aligns closely with Tesla’s advertised 500-mile figure for the Long Range trim. The 548 kWh Standard Range pack works out to approximately 320 miles, again consistent with Tesla’s stated 325-mile target.
Here is a direct comparison of the two versions based on the CARB filing and published specs:
| Tesla Semi Spec | Long Range | Standard Range |
| Battery Capacity | 822 kWh | 548 kWh |
| Battery Chemistry | NCMA Li-Ion | NCMA Li-Ion |
| Peak Motor Power | 800 kW | 525 kW |
| Estimated Range | ~500 miles | ~325 miles |
| Efficiency | ~1.7 kWh/mile | ~1.7 kWh/mile |
| Est. Price | ~$290,000 | ~$260,000 |
| GVW Rating | 82,000 lbs | 82,000 lbs |
The timing of this certification is not incidental. On April 29, 2026, Semi Programme Director Dan Priestley confirmed on X that high-volume production is now ramping at Tesla’s dedicated 1.7-million-square-foot facility in Sparks, Nevada. A key advantage of the Nevada location is vertical integration: the 4680 battery cells powering the Semi are manufactured in the same complex, eliminating the supply chain bottleneck that had delayed the program for years.
Tesla’s long-term goal is to reach a production capacity of 50,000 trucks annually at the Nevada factory, which would represent roughly 20 percent of the entire North American Class 8 market. With CARB certification now in hand and the production line running, the regulatory and manufacturing groundwork for that target is in place.
Tesla became the first company to pass the United States government’s new Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) testing with the Model Y, completing each of the new tests with a passing performance.
In a landmark announcement on May 7, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) declared the 2026 Tesla Model Y the first vehicle to pass its newly ADAS benchmark under the New Car Assessment Program (NCAP).
Model Y vehicles manufactured on or after November 12, 2025, met rigorous pass/fail criteria for four newly added tests—pedestrian automatic emergency braking, lane keeping assistance, blind spot warning, and blind spot intervention—while also satisfying the program’s original four ADAS requirements: forward collision warning, crash imminent braking, dynamic brake support, and lane departure warning.
The NHTSA has just officially announced that the 2026 @Tesla Model Y is the first vehicle model to pass the agency’s new advanced driver assistance system tests.
2026 Tesla Model Y vehicles, manufactured on or after Nov. 12, 2025, successfully met the new criteria for four… pic.twitter.com/as8x1OsSL5
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) May 7, 2026
NHTSA administration Jonathan Morrison hailed the achievement as a milestone:
“Today’s announcement marks a significant step forward in our efforts to provide consumers with the most comprehensive safety ratings ever. By successfully passing these new tests, the 2026 Tesla Model Y demonstrates the lifesaving potential of driver assistance technologies and sets a high bar for the industry. We hope to see many more manufacturers develop vehicles that can meet these requirements.”
The updates to NCAP, finalized in late 2024 and effective for 2026 models, reflect growing recognition that ADAS features are no longer optional luxuries but essential tools for preventing crashes.
Pedestrian automatic emergency braking, for instance, targets one of the fastest-rising causes of roadway fatalities, while blind spot intervention and lane keeping assistance address common sources of side-swipes and run-off-road incidents. By incorporating objective, performance-based evaluations rather than mere presence of the technology, NHTSA aims to give buyers clearer data on real-world effectiveness.
This milestone arrives at a pivotal moment when vehicle autonomy is transitioning from science fiction to everyday reality.
Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (FSD) software and the impending rollout of robotaxis underscore a broader industry shift toward higher levels of automation. Yet regulators and consumers remain cautious: safety data must keep pace with technological ambition.
The Model Y’s perfect score on these ADAS benchmarks validates that current driver-assist systems—when engineered rigorously—can dramatically reduce human error, which still accounts for the vast majority of crashes.
For Tesla, the result reinforces its long-standing claim of building the safest vehicles on the road. More importantly, it signals to the entire auto sector that meeting elevated federal standards is achievable and expected.
As autonomy edges closer to Level 3 and beyond, where drivers may disengage more fully, such independent verification becomes critical. It builds public trust, informs purchasing decisions, and accelerates the development of systems that could one day eliminate tens of thousands of annual traffic deaths.
In an era when software-defined vehicles promise transformative mobility, the 2026 Model Y’s NHTSA triumph is more than a manufacturer accolade—it is a regulatory green light that autonomy’s future must be built on proven, testable safety foundations. The bar has been raised. The industry, and the roads we share, will be safer for it.
Tesla is going to fix the nearly 219,000 vehicles that it recalled due to an issue with the rearview camera with a simple software update, giving owners no need to travel to a service center to resolve the problem.
Tesla is formally recalling 218,868 U.S. vehicles after regulators discovered a software glitch that can delay the rearview camera image by up to 11 seconds when drivers shift into reverse.
The affected models include certain 2024-2025 Model 3 and Model Y, as well as 2023-2025 Model S and Model X vehicles running software version 2026.8.6 and equipped with Hardware 3 computers. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) determined the lag violates Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 111 on rear visibility and could increase crash risk.
Yet this is no ordinary recall. Owners do not need to schedule a service-center visit, hand over keys, or wait for parts.
Tesla fans call for recall terminology update, but the NHTSA isn’t convinced it’s needed
Tesla identified the issue on April 10, halted further deployment of the faulty firmware the same day, and began pushing a corrective over-the-air (OTA) software update on April 11.
By the time the NHTSA posted the recall notice on May 6, more than 99.92 percent of the affected fleet had already received the fix. Tesla reports no crashes, injuries, or fatalities linked to the glitch.
The episode underscores a deeper problem with regulatory language. For decades, “recall” meant hauling a vehicle to a dealership for hardware repairs or replacements. That definition no longer fits software-defined cars. When a fix arrives wirelessly in minutes — identical to an iPhone update — the term evokes unnecessary alarm and misleads the public about the actual risk and remedy.
Elon Musk has repeatedly called for exactly this change. After earlier NHTSA actions, he stated plainly: “The terminology is outdated & inaccurate. This is a tiny over-the-air software update.” On another occasion, he added that labeling OTA fixes as recalls is “anachronistic and just flat wrong.”
The terminology is outdated & inaccurate. This is a tiny over-the-air software update. To the best of our knowledge, there have been no injuries.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 22, 2022
Musk’s point is simple: regulators must evolve their vocabulary to match the technology. Traditional recalls involve physical intervention and downtime; OTA updates do not. Retaining the old label distorts consumer perception, inflates perceived defect rates, and slows the industry’s shift to faster, safer software iteration.
Tesla’s rapid, remote remedy demonstrates the safety advantage of over-the-air capability. Problems that once required weeks of dealer appointments are now resolved in hours, often before most owners notice. As more automakers adopt software-first designs, the entire regulatory framework needs to catch up.
Updating “recall” terminology would align language with reality, reduce public confusion, and recognize that modern vehicles are no longer static hardware — they are continuously improving computers on wheels.
For the 219,000 Tesla owners involved, the process is already complete. The camera works, the car is safe, and no one left their driveway. That is the new standard — and the vocabulary should reflect it.
Tesla Semi’s official battery capacity leaked by California regulators
Tesla crushes NHTSA’s brand-new ADAS safety tests – first vehicle to ever pass
