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.
News
Tesla rolls out most aggressive Model Y lease deal in the US yet
With the promotion in place, customers would be able to take home a Model Y at a very low cost.
Tesla has rolled out what could very well be its most aggressive promotion for Model Y leases in the United States yet. With the promotion in place, customers would be able to take home a Model Y at a very low cost.
Zero downpayment leases
The new Model Y lease promotion was initially reported on X, with industry watcher Sawyer Merritt stating that while the vehicles’ monthly payments are still similar to before, the cars can now be ordered with a $0 downpayment.
Tesla community members noted that this promotion would cut the full payment cost of Model Y leases by several thousand dollars, though prices were still a bit better when the $7,500 federal tax credit was still in effect. Despite this, a $0 downpayment would likely be appreciated by customers, as it lowers the entry point to the Tesla ecosystem by a notable margin.
Premium freebies included
Apart from a $0 downpayment, customers of Model Y leases are also provided one free upgrade for their vehicles. These upgrades could be premium paint, such as Pearl White Multi-Coat, Deep Blue Metallic, Diamond Black, Quicksilver or Ultra Red, or 20″ Helix 2.0 Wheels. Customers could also opt for a White Interior or a Tow Hitch free of charge.
A look at Tesla’s Model Y order page shows that the promotion is available for all the Model Y Premium Rear-Wheel Drive and the Model Y Premium All-Wheel Drive. The Model Y Standard and the Model Y Performance are not eligible for the $0 downpayment or free premium upgrade promotion as of writing.
@teslarati 🚨 Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.1.7 is here and here’s some things it did extremely well! #tesla #teslafsd #fullselfdriving ♬ You Have It – Marscott
News
Tesla is looking to phase out China-made parts at US factories: report
Tesla has reportedly swapped out several China-made components already, aiming to complete the transition within the next two years.
Tesla has reportedly started directing its suppliers to eliminate China-made components from vehicles built in the United States. This would make Tesla’s US-produced vehicles even more American-made.
The update was initially reported by The Wall Street Journal.
Accelerating North American sourcing
As per the WSJ report, the shift reportedly came amidst escalating tariff uncertainties between Washington and Beijing. Citing people reportedly familiar with the matter, the publication claimed that Tesla has already swapped out several China-made components, aiming to complete the transition within the next two years. The publication also claimed that Tesla has been reducing its reliance on China-based suppliers since the pandemic disrupted supply chains.
The company has quietly increased North American sourcing over the past two years as tariff concerns have intensified. If accurate, Tesla would likely end up with vehicles that are even more locally sourced than they are today. It would remain to be seen, however, if a change in suppliers for its US-made vehicles would result in price adjustments for cars like the Model 3 and Model Y.
Industry-wide reassessments
Tesla is not alone in reevaluating its dependence on China. Auto executives across the automotive industry have been in rapid-response mode amid shifting trade policies, chip supply anxiety, and concerns over rare-earth materials. Fluctuating tariffs between the United States and China during President Donald Trump’s current term have made pricing strategies quite unpredictable as well, as noted in a Reuters report.
General Motors this week issued a similar directive to thousands of suppliers, instructing them to remove China-origin components from their supply chains. The same is true for Stellantis, which also announced earlier this year that it was implementing several strategies to avoid tariffs that were placed by the Trump administration.
@teslarati 🚨 Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.1.7 is here and here’s some things it did extremely well! #tesla #teslafsd #fullselfdriving ♬ You Have It – Marscott
News
Tesla owners propose interesting theory about Apple CarPlay and EV tax credit
“100%. It’s needed for sales because for many prospective buyers, CarPlay is a nonnegotiable must-have. If they knew how good the Tesla UI is, they wouldn’t think they need CarPlay,” one owner said.
Tesla is reportedly bracing for the integration of Apple’s well-known iOS automotive platform, CarPlay, into its vehicles after the company had avoided it for years.
However, now that it’s here, owners are more than clear that they do not want it, and they have their theories about why it’s on its way. Some believe it might have to do with the EV tax credit, or rather, the loss of it.
Owners are more interested in why Tesla is doing this now, especially considering that so many have been outspoken about the fact that they would not use it in favor of the company’s user interface (UI), which is extremely well done.
After Bloomberg reported that Tesla was working on Apple CarPlay integration, the reactions immediately started pouring in. From my perspective, having used both Apple CarPlay in two previous vehicles and going to Tesla’s in-house UI in my Model Y, both platforms definitely have their advantages.
However, Tesla’s UI just works with its vehicles, as it is intuitive and well-engineered for its cars specifically. Apple CarPlay was always good, but it was buggy at times, which could be attributed to the vehicle and not the software, and not as user-friendly, but that is subjective.
Nevertheless, upon the release of Bloomberg’s report, people immediately challenged the need for it:
Everyone thinks they need it. I would think that too if I didn’t know how good Tesla’s interface was. CarPlay is a crappy layer on top of crappy info-navs, and people think it’s an imperative because it provides a level of consistency from car to car. They have no clue how much…
— Rich Stafford (@r26174_rich) November 14, 2025
How can it not be when the best engineers choose Tesla over Apple and Tesla’s core focus is auto vs Apple being mobile. It’s what Tesla does every day. It’s a side project for Apple. Still Apple is much better than any other auto OEM who attract lesser talent and make digital…
— Emu (@confessedemu) November 14, 2025
Some fans proposed an interesting point: What if Tesla is using CarPlay as a counter to losing the $7,500 EV tax credit? Perhaps it is an interesting way to attract customers who have not owned a Tesla before but are more interested in having a vehicle equipped with CarPlay?
“100%. It’s needed for sales because for many prospective buyers, CarPlay is a nonnegotiable must-have. If they knew how good the Tesla UI is, they wouldn’t think they need CarPlay,” one owner said.
Tesla has made a handful of moves to attract people to its cars after losing the tax credit. This could be a small but potentially mighty strategy that will pull some carbuyers to Tesla, especially now that the Apple CarPlay box is checked.
@teslarati :rotating_light: This is why you need to use off-peak rates at Tesla Superchargers! #tesla #evcharging #fyp ♬ Blue Moon – Muspace Lofi
-
News1 week agoTesla shares rare peek at Semi factory’s interior
-
Elon Musk1 week agoTesla says texting and driving capability is coming ‘in a month or two’
-
News1 week agoTesla makes online ordering even easier
-
News1 week agoTesla Model Y Performance set for new market entrance in Q1
-
News1 week agoTesla Cybercab production starts Q2 2026, Elon Musk confirms
-
News6 days agoTesla is launching a crazy new Rental program with cheap daily rates
-
News1 week agoTesla China expecting full FSD approval in Q1 2026: Elon Musk
-
News1 week agoTesla Model Y Performance is rapidly moving toward customer deliveries