Connect with us

News

SpaceX nails reused booster launch, Falcon Heavy’s maiden flight days away

Published

on

Despite a brief 24-hour delay due to weather and minor mechanical issues, SpaceX recycled the launch opportunity and completed the mission on Wednesday afternoon, January 31. Tasked with carrying GovSat-1 to orbit, the reused Falcon 9 rocket (Booster 1032) performed flawlessly and as expected, although the stage was expended. Launch directors confirmed just before the end of the live webcast that the communications satellite, a public-private partnership between SES and Luxembourg, was placed into a good orbit a few minutes before it separated from Falcon 9’s second stage. The mission marks SpaceX’s second successful launch of 2018, its first reused flight of the year, and the last launch before Falcon Heavy’s inaugural flight – currently scheduled for Tuesday, February 6.

Perhaps most intriguingly (or at least uniquely), the to-be-expended booster was still seen outfitted with both grid fins and landing legs at the launch pad, the new legs a stark white against the dark and sooty backdrop of the Falcon 9’s recycled booster. While SpaceX’s webcast host very explicitly stated at least three times that the first stage was not going to be recovered, careful listeners may have still caught snippets of the launch and recovery directors announcing different milestones as Falcon 9 S1 landed softly in the Atlantic Ocean. Similar to the recovery operations after the launch of Iridium-4 in December 2018, S1 flew as if it were landing aboard a drone ship, although in the case of this launch that theatricality extended even to landing legs.

While it may seem quite odd that SpaceX would choose to expend an entire, recoverable rocket, it is presumed that SpaceX is simply choosing to rid itself of a stock of older boosters incapable of flying more than once or twice – preparing for the introduction of the highly reusable Block 5 of Falcon 9, in other words. As stated by the webcast host, a SpaceX engineer, the company’s goal is for boosters to last “tens of launches in the short term, and hundreds or thousands of launches in the long term.” It is worth remembering that expending rocket boosters in the ocean (or even over land for Russia and China) is the status quo of all non-SpaceX rockets, and SpaceX has only just begun to perfect booster recovery and reuse – the first successful ocean recovery was completed less than two years ago. The very fact that it already feels odd or even wrong to “throw away” hardware into the ocean after launch is a testament to just how rapidly SpaceX have changed both the figurative and literal paradigms of orbital rocketry, and it is only a matter of time before the eminently persistent company ends the practice of expendable launches internally, if not globally.

Up next, Falcon Heavy

After yet another successful mission for SpaceX, the company’s Florida efforts will now briefly focus on the imminent inaugural launch of Falcon Heavy, the company’s newest and largest rocket. Loosely penciled in for liftoff on Tuesday, February 6, the massive vehicle will become the most powerful and capable operational rocket in the world, comparable only to the likes of NASA’s Saturn V and Space Shuttle, as well as the Soviet Union’s short-lived Energia. Regardless of its place against a historical backdrop of massive state-funded rockets, Falcon Heavy will by default become the most powerful commercial launch vehicle ever developed, and that title will almost certainly remain uncontested until 2020 at the absolute earliest. If or when the first and smallest version of NASA’s SLS rocket launches, likely also no earlier than 2020, the space agency may well take the crown back for a brief year or so. Regardless, SpaceX will likely be regularly launching Falcon Heavies and nearing the tail end of the development and testing of its much larger BFR rocket and spaceship.

Falcon Heavy will be the clearest progress yet towards such a massive rocket, and will provide SpaceX with invaluable experience and expertise as the only private company to ever operate a super heavy-lift launch vehicle (SHLLV). After a solid four weeks of near-constant testing, bug-fixing, and retesting, Falcon Heavy just days ago completed its first static fire, marking the first point in its history that all 27 of its first stage engines were simultaneously ignited. The data produced by that crucial test was apparently satisfactory, and Elon Musk just yesterday reiterated that the vehicle’s first launch was still targeting February 6.

Advertisement

Follow along live as launch photographer Tom Cross and your intrepid author cover these groundbreaking events live.

Teslarati   –   Instagram Twitter

Tom CrossInstagram

Eric Ralph Twitter

 

Advertisement

Eric Ralph is Teslarati's senior spaceflight reporter and has been covering the industry in some capacity for almost half a decade, largely spurred in 2016 by a trip to Mexico to watch Elon Musk reveal SpaceX's plans for Mars in person. Aside from spreading interest and excitement about spaceflight far and wide, his primary goal is to cover humanity's ongoing efforts to expand beyond Earth to the Moon, Mars, and elsewhere.

Advertisement
Comments

News

SpaceX Starship Flight 13 faces wrath of the Texas skies

SpaceX pushed Starship Flight 13 to Friday, blaming weather instead of the previous engine issues.

Published

on

By

SpaceX called off Thursday’s launch attempt of Starship Flight 13, pushing the mission to Friday because of weather tied to Tropical Storm Bertha. The company confirmed the delay on X, noting “Now targeting Friday, July 24 for Starship’s thirteenth flight test, due to weather. A key objective for the flight test is to get clear imagery from the ground of Starship’s heatshield as it flies at a higher dynamic pressure during ascent, which won’t be possible with today’s weather conditions.”

This is the second delay for Flight 13 in two weeks. SpaceX first tried to launch the mission on July 16, but the countdown ended in an automated abort at T-0 when four of Super Heavy Booster 20’s 33 Raptor engines failed to ignite. Musk said at the time that two Raptors would need to be removed and replaced, as Teslarati reported. The company spent the following week destacking Ship 40 and Booster 20, swapping engines, and running leak checks before restacking the vehicle on Pad 2 Wednesday night, according to Spaceflight Now’s live coverage.

Elon Musk debunks $52 billion SpaceX-NVIDIA GPU deal

 

Unlike the engine problem, Thursday’s delay has nothing to do with the hardware. SpaceX wants clean footage of Starship’s heat shield captured from the ground as the vehicle flies through max dynamic pressure, something the storm’s cloud cover over South Texas would not allow. The company said visibility should improve for Friday’s attempt, with the same 90 minute window opening at 5:45 p.m. CT.

Advertisement

Flight 13 will be the second outing for the V3 versions of Starship and Super Heavy, following their debut on Flight 12 in May. The mission carries 20 production Starlink V3 satellites, the first time SpaceX has flown operational satellites rather than mass simulators on Starship. Six of those satellites are fitted with cameras to inspect the heat shield from a different angle during ascent, giving engineers a second data source beyond the ground imagery the weather is currently blocking.

Booster 20 will attempt a boostback burn and a splashdown landing burn in the Gulf of America, while Ship 40 follows a suborbital trajectory toward a landing in the Indian Ocean. The flight plan largely mirrors Flight 12, though the booster will run a more aggressive ascent burn after max Q this time, and the ship’s heat shield includes load sensing tiles meant to measure stress at the higher dynamic pressure SpaceX is targeting.

If Friday’s attempt succeeds, Flight 13 could be the last suborbital test in the program. SpaceX is already looking to push for an orbital flight on Flight 14.

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

Tesla stock tumbles after earnings, one of its sharpest single-day declines

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla stock (NASDAQ: TSLA) endured one of its sharpest single-day declines in years on July 23, tumbling approximately 14.5 percent and closing near $320 after opening the session around $374. The drop erased more than $140 billion in market value amid heavy trading volume and left the shares at multi-week lows.

The sell-off followed the company’s second-quarter 2026 results, released the previous evening. Tesla reported record revenue of $28.2 billion, up 26 percent year over year, driven by a Q2-record 480,126 vehicle deliveries. Energy storage deployments also rose strongly.

Tesla (TSLA) Q2 2026 earnings results: miss on EPS, beat on revenue

Yet profitability disappointed sharply. Operating income fell 57 percent to $398 million, compressing the operating margin to just 1.4 percent. Non-GAAP earnings per share came in at $0.33, well below the roughly $0.53 analysts had expected. Free cash flow turned negative by $1.1 billion as capital expenditures surged 142 percent to $5.8 billion, largely tied to accelerated spending on artificial intelligence, robotics, and autonomous systems.

The losses on capex were expected, as Tesla said it would be spending heavily in 2026.

Advertisement

Investors also reacted to lingering uncertainty surrounding key product timelines. During the Earnings Call, management reiterated ambitions for Robotaxi deployment and the Optimus humanoid robot, but offered limited new concrete milestones, renewing questions about execution pace that have long accompanied Tesla’s ambitious roadmap.

The magnitude of the decline places it among Tesla’s more severe one-day percentage losses since its 2010 initial public offering. Historically, the two largest single-day drops (split-adjusted) remain September 8, 2020, when shares fell 21.1 percent amid broader market volatility and valuation concerns, and January 13, 2012, with a 19.3 percent plunge during the company’s early growth struggles.

Other notable declines include an 18.6 percent drop on March 16, 2020, at the onset of pandemic-related market turmoil. Thursday’s move ranks roughly ninth on the all-time list but stands out as the steepest in more than a year.

Despite the short-term pain, Tesla’s long-term trajectory has repeatedly recovered from such volatility. The latest results underscore both the strength of its core automotive and energy businesses and the near-term costs of heavy investment in next-generation technologies.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Elon Musk is not happy about this Tesla Full Self-Driving approval delay

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Elon Musk clapped back at France’s decision to withhold the approval for Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (FSD) Supervised system, projecting a clear and blunt message to French Transport Minister Phillippe Tabarot, after he publicly rejected the technology in its current form.

Tabarot outlines several concerns with Tesla Full Self-Driving in a detailed video statement, where he said, “The safety trade-offs are not yet sufficient to authorize it as it currently stands,” he said. He emphasized that FSD is not a true self-driving system and that the driver remains fully responsible.

Key issues Tabarot also brought up included allowing speeding when surrounding traffic exceeds limits and what he believes are insufficient guarantees of driver attention during complex urban maneuvers such as lane changes, intersections, and roundabouts.

Advertisement

While acknowledging technological progress and France’s support for autonomous innovation, Tabarot stressed that deployment must prioritize road safety. He noted ongoing technical discussions with Tesla, the Netherlands, and other European partners, with further ecosystem meetings planned for the fall.

Musk’s rebuke highlights the human cost of regulatory caution. Tesla’s latest safety reports provide compelling data supporting accelerated adoption. In the most recent 12-month period, vehicles using FSD (Supervised) recorded one major collision per approximately 5.1 million miles driven, dramatically better than the U.S. national average of one crash per 698,000 miles.

Even Tesla vehicles driven manually with active safety features outperform the average by a wide margin. These figures come from billions of real-world miles of telemetry, showing FSD vehicles involved in far fewer incidents than both manual Teslas and the broader U.S. fleet.

Critics argue Tesla’s comparisons require careful scrutiny regarding reporting thresholds and fleet demographics, yet the data consistently positions FSD as a potential lifesaver. With road fatalities remaining a leading cause of death worldwide, Musk contends that proven safer technology should not face prolonged bureaucratic hurdles.

France’s measured approach reflects the broader European regulatory caution, which many, especially Musk, have been critical of in the past. However, as autonomous systems from Tesla and competitors like Waymo demonstrate superior safety in independent studies, pressure is mounting for harmonized approvals.

Advertisement

Musk’s warning carries the belief that every month of delay may equate to avoidable tragedies on European roads.

Continue Reading