News
SpaceX’s next Falcon Heavy launch and landing could be more than a year away
According to comments made by US Air Force officials prior to SpaceX’s latest Falcon Heavy launch, the payload assigned to the military’s first fully-certified Falcon Heavy has been swapped with another, although the mission’s late-2020 launch target remains relatively unchanged.
This new information comes on the heels of the June 25th launch of Space Test Program 2 (STP-2), SpaceX’s third successful Falcon Heavy mission and a huge milestone for the rocket’s future as a competitive option for US military launches. Perhaps most importantly, it confirms – barring a surprise launch contract or internal Starlink mission – that Falcon Heavy’s next (and fourth) launch is unlikely to occur until late next year, a gap of at least 15-17 months.
Announced roughly four months after Falcon Heavy’s inaugural February 2018 launch debut, the USAF contracted with SpaceX to launch the ~6350 kg (14,000 lb) AFSPC-52 satellite no earlier than (NET) September 2020. In February 2019, Department of Defense contract announcements revealed that SpaceX had been awarded three military launch contracts, two for the National Reconnaissance Office (NROL-85 & NROL-87) and one for the USAF (AFSPC-44), all tentatively scheduled to launch in 2021.
First reported by Spaceflight Now, Col. Robert Bongiovi – director of the launch enterprise systems directorate at the Air Force’s Space and Missile Systems Center (AFSMC) – recently indicated that AFSPC-44 – not AFSPC-52 – is now scheduled to be the US military’s first post-certification Falcon Heavy launch. 52 and 44 have essentially swapped spots, with AFSPC-44 moving forward to NET Q4 (fall) 2020 while AFSPC-52 has been delayed to NET Q2 (spring) 2021.
The trouble with launch gaps
Although Bongiovi did not explicitly state that AFSPC-44 will be SpaceX’s next Falcon Heavy launch, there are no publicly-disclosed missions set to launch on the rocket in the interim. That could theoretically change, especially if SpaceX has plans to launch the massive rocket in support of an internal Starlink mission or even something more exotic, but the loss of both Block 5 center core B1055 and B1057 means that the company will have to build an entirely new center core.
SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy lead times are far superior to competitor ULA’s Delta IV Heavy production line, but the process of manufacturing new center cores is still quite lengthy. Critically, Falcon Heavy Block 5 center cores require strengthened octawebs, custom interstages, and propellant tanks that are significantly thicker than those used on Falcon 9. For all intents and purposes, a center core is a totally different rocket relative to a Falcon 9 booster, the latter being SpaceX’s primary focus at the company’s assembly line-style Hawthorne factory. It’s theoretically possible for a dedicated Falcon Heavy center core build to be expedited or leapfrogged forward in the production queue, but most long-lead Falcon 9 booster hardware physically cannot be redirected to speed up center core production.
Unless SpaceX was already in the process of building a new center core prior B1057’s unsuccessful landing attempt, it’s safe to assume that the next custom Falcon Heavy booster is unlikely to be completed until early 2020, if not later. In theory, this means that Falcon Heavy could be dormant for no less than 16 months between STP-2 and its next launch. Traditionally, that sort of lengthy gap between launches has been frowned upon by NASA, ULA, and oversight groups like GAO. If a given rocket doesn’t launch for a year or more, it can potentially pose a risk to reliability and raise costs as its production and launch teams have no satisfactory way to fully preserve their technical expertise.
This can be compared to attempting to become an expert at a musical instrument while only having access to said instrument one or two months a year, essentially impossible. In fact, at one point, NASA hoped to require its Space Launch System (SLS) rocket be able to launch no less than once per year, partly motivated by a desire to mitigate some of the deterioration that can follow extremely low launch cadences. Years later, financial constraints and years upon years of delays and budget overruns have made such a cadence effectively impossible for SLS/Orion, but the fact remains that launching a rocket just once every 18-24 months is likely to inflate both costs and risks.
Thankfully, SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy could scarcely be more different than NASA’s SLS and the retired Space Shuttle it derives most of its hardware from. Even if all things are held equal and not flying a Falcon Heavy center core for 16+ months increases risk and cost, center cores are still heavily derived from Falcon 9 booster technology, including plumbing, avionics, attitude control thrusters, Merlin 1D engines, landing legs, and launch facilities.
Furthermore, the center core is just one of five distinct assemblies that make up a given Falcon Heavy. Both side boosters are effectively Falcon 9 Block 5 boosters with nose cones instead of interstages and slight modifications to support booster attachment hardware, while the upper stage and payload fairing are the same for all Falcon launches. In other words, SpaceX’s workforce will continue to build, launch, land, and reuse dozens of Falcon 9 boosters – as well as upper stages payload fairings – between now and Falcon Heavy Flight 4, even if it’s NET Q4 2020. In a worst-case scenario, SpaceX production and launch staff will be unfamiliar and inexperienced with maybe 20% of Falcon Heavy – at least in a very rough sense. Even then, much of that unfamiliarity may still be tempered by the fact that Falcon Heavy center cores share a large amount of commonality with the Falcon 9 first stages SpaceX’s workforce will remain deeply familiar with.
Indeed, Falcon Heavy’s second launch has already demonstrated this to some extent, occurring without issue more than 14 months after the rocket’s inaugural launch. It seems that the only real loss incurred by a ~16-month delay between Flights 3 and 4 will be having to wait another year (or more) to witness Falcon Heavy’s next launch.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk pivots SpaceX plans to Moon base before Mars
The shift, Musk explained, is driven by launch cadence and the urgency of securing humanity’s long-term survival beyond Earth, among others.
Elon Musk has clarified that SpaceX is prioritizing the Moon over Mars as the fastest path to establishing a self-growing off-world civilization.
The shift, Musk explained, is driven by launch cadence and the urgency of securing humanity’s long-term survival beyond Earth, among others.
Why the Moon is now SpaceX’s priority
In a series of posts on X, Elon Musk stated that SpaceX is focusing on building a self-growing city on the Moon because it can be achieved significantly faster than a comparable settlement on Mars. As per Musk, a Moon city could possibly be completed in under 10 years, while a similar settlement on Mars would likely require more than 20.
“For those unaware, SpaceX has already shifted focus to building a self-growing city on the Moon, as we can potentially achieve that in less than 10 years, whereas Mars would take 20+ years. The mission of SpaceX remains the same: extend consciousness and life as we know it to the stars,” Musk wrote in a post on X.
Musk highlighted that launch windows to Mars only open roughly every 26 months, with a six-month transit time, whereas missions to the Moon can launch approximately every 10 days and arrive in about two days. That difference, Musk stated, allows SpaceX to iterate far more rapidly on infrastructure, logistics, and survival systems.
“The critical path to a self-growing Moon city is faster,” Musk noted in a follow-up post.
Mars still matters, but runs in parallel
Despite the pivot to the Moon, Musk stressed that SpaceX has not abandoned Mars. Instead, Mars development is expected to begin in about five to seven years and proceed alongside the company’s lunar efforts.
Musk explained that SpaceX would continue launching directly from Earth to Mars when possible, rather than routing missions through the Moon, citing limited fuel availability on the lunar surface. The Moon’s role, he stated, is not as a staging point for Mars, but as the fastest achievable location for a self-sustaining off-world civilization.
“The Moon would establish a foothold beyond Earth quickly, to protect life against risk of a natural or manmade disaster on Earth,” Musk wrote.
News
Elon Musk confirms Tesla Semi will enter high-volume production this year
Musk shared his update in a post on social media platform X.
Elon Musk has confirmed that Tesla will begin high-volume production of the Class 8 all-electric Semi this year.
He shared his update in a post on social media platform X.
Musk confirms Tesla Semi production ramp
Tesla CEO Elon Musk reaffirmed on X that the Semi is finally moving into volume production, posting on Sunday that “Tesla Semi starts high volume production this year.”
The update comes as Tesla refreshed its Semi lineup on its official website, an apparent hint that the program is transitioning from limited pilots into wider commercial deployment. As per Tesla’s official website, two variants of the Semi will be offered to consumers: Standard and Long Range.
The Standard trim offers up to 325 miles of range with an energy consumption rating of 1.7 kWh per mile and a gross combination weight rating of 82,000 pounds. The Long Range version pushes driving range to 500 miles, with Tesla noting a higher curb weight of about 23,000 pounds, likely due to a larger battery pack.
Both trims support fast charging, with Tesla stating that the Semi can recover up to 60% of its range in 30 minutes using compatible charging infrastructure.
Broader Tesla Semi rollout
Tesla has already delivered production Semi units to select partners, including snack and beverage giant PepsiCo as well as logistics behemoth DHL, which confirmed that its truck operates daily in California, traveling roughly 100 miles per day and requiring charging just about once a week.
The company has also partnered with Uber Freight, as noted in a Benzinga report, with Tesla executives previously describing the agreement as a way for fleet operators to experience the Semi’s lower operating and maintenance costs firsthand.
With Musk now publicly committing to high-volume production, the Semi appears poised to move beyond pilot programs and into scaled commercial use, an important step in Tesla’s wider push to electrify heavy-duty and long-range trucking.
News
Tesla tops France reliability rankings, beating Toyota for the first time
The milestone was celebrated by CEO Elon Musk on social media platform X.
Tesla has overtaken Toyota to become France’s most reliable car brand in 2025, as per a new nationwide reliability ranking published by Auto Plus magazine.
The milestone was celebrated by CEO Elon Musk on social media platform X.
Tesla tops reliability ranking in France
Tesla ranked first overall in Auto Plus’ 2025 reliability study, surpassing long-time benchmark Toyota across all powertrain types, including gasoline, hybrid, and electric vehicles.
The ranking, published on February 6, 2026, evaluated early problems reported in 2025 on vehicles registered in France since January 1, 2018, with fewer than 150,000 kilometers on the odometer, as noted by a Numerama report. This marked Tesla’s first appearance in the magazine’s reliability rankings, which was enabled by the company’s growing vehicle population in the French market.
According to the publication, Tesla vehicles showed no recurring major defects beyond isolated suspension arm issues, which are covered under the company’s four-year or 80,000-kilometer warranty. Other reported issues were described as minor, including occasional screen glitches and door handle concerns.
Why this ranking differs from earlier criticism
Tesla’s top placement contrasts sharply with past assessments from the German Automobile Club (ADAC), which previously ranked the Model 3 and Model Y low in its technical inspection reports. Auto Plus noted that those inspections were focused heavily on factors such as brake disc wear, which are not necessarily the best benchmarks for overall vehicle reliability.
By focusing instead on real-world reliability data and early ownership issues, Auto Plus’ methodology offered a broader picture of how vehicles perform over time rather than how individual components age under inspection standards. The publication emphasized that electric vehicles, with far fewer moving parts than combustion-engine cars, are not inherently less reliable.
While the ranking supports the case that electric vehicles can match or exceed the reliability of traditional brands, the magazine acknowledged limitations in its analysis. Still, Tesla’s debut at the top of the list underscores how perceptions of EV durability are shifting as more long-term data becomes available in major automotive markets like France.
Elon Musk pivots SpaceX plans to Moon base before Mars
Elon Musk confirms Tesla Semi will enter high-volume production this year
