News
SpaceX and NASA are go for the 12th Cargo Dragon launch on Monday
Just under 24 hours ahead of the launch of CRS-12, NASA and SpaceX provided information about the mission earlier this morning during a pre-launch press conference.
NASA confirmed once more that tomorrow’s launch attempt will be the only slot available until August 19th or 20th, due to a planned EVA (extra vehicular activity) that will involve the launch of cubesats around the ISS. As a result of safety restrictions, cargo and crew spacecraft are not allowed to approach the International Space Station while crew are outside, nor while satellites launched from the station have yet to have their orbits characterized. The United Launch Alliance has a launch planned for August 18th or 19th, with SpaceX able to make a second attempt after ULA’s launch, if necessary.
CRS-12’s Dragon and Falcon 9 1039 horizontal at LC-39A ahead of a launch attempt on Monday.
(NASASpaceflight /u/Craig_VG)
Revealed by NASASpaceflight.com in an article posted yesterday, “some but not all of the Block 5 upgrades, including some incremental upgrades like increased engine thrust, will debut…on the CRS-12 launch”. Hans Koenigsmann, the Vice President of Mission Assurance at SpaceX, was not aware of specific differences between past launches, but did not deny that there would be some level of incremental improvements present for the launch of CRS-12. Interestingly, Gebhardt also reported that Falcon 9 Block 5, intended to be a highly reusable “final” version of the vehicle, is expected to take flight for the first time during SpaceX’s first Commercial Crew Demo-1 launch as soon as February 2018.
Koenigsmann further confirmed that the launch of CRS-12 would make use of reused landing legs, although their origin is unknown. As far as he was aware, the legs are the only reused hardware that will be present during the launch.
The lack of backup attempts for CRS-12’s launch means that more focus is being placed on weather conditions at the launch site. As of several days ago, weather forecasts were looking negative for the launch and suggesting a 70% or greater chance of conditions that would prevent a launch attempt. However, this has flipped around over the last 24 hours, and the probably of weather violations is now only 30%. The Air Force’s 45th Space Wing did release a report today indicating that conditions after the launch may make safing the landed first stage more difficult for SpaceX, with an increased potential for rain and lightning.
If all goes well, core 1039 will attempt a landing tomorrow afternoon at SpaceX’s Landing Zone 1 (LZ-1). (SpaceX)
Also discussed briefly during the press conference, necessary modifications to the LC-39A pad are still set to occur this fall ahead of Falcon Heavy’s inaugural launch before the end of the year. LC-40 is also progressing nicely and while Koenigsmann stated that SpaceX had not as of yet decided on the first mission to fly from the reactivated pad, it is currently expected to be SES-11 sometime early in the fourth quarter of 2017. SES-11 has also been hinted to be launching aboard a reused Falcon 9 first stage, and would make for a fitting return to operational status for the pad.
In other news, CRS-13, which will fly with a refurbished Dragon spacecraft, is now set to launch no earlier than December 2017. Previously aiming for a November launch, it has almost certainly been pushed back as a result of Orbital-ATK choosing to slightly delay their next launch of their Cygnus spacecraft until November. This extra time will allow OATK to accommodate more cubesat payloads during that launch, and the delays of Cygnus’ OA-7 mission or Dragon’s CRS-13 launch are anticipated to be the result of technical issues.
Catch the first launch attempt of CRS-12 live tomorrow at the link below! The expected moment of liftoff is approximately 12:31 p.m. EST, 9:31 a.m. PST.
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
