Connect with us

News

SpaceX’s next Falcon Heavy launch may feature record-breaking center core landing

Falcon Heavy clears the top of the tower in a spectacular fashion during its debut launch. (Tom Cross/Pauline Acalin)

Published

7 years ago

on

Thanks to a temporary reopening of the US federal government, SpaceX was finally able to continue the process of filing FCC and FAA paperwork needed to acquire permits for upcoming launches, including Falcon Heavy.

One such filing related to the first operational Falcon Heavy launch has revealed a fairly impressive statistic: comprised of three first stage boosters, SpaceX indicated that Falcon Heavy’s center core will attempt to land on drone ship Of Course I Still Love You (OCISLY) nearly 1000 km (600 mi) away from its launch site, easily smashing the record for the greatest distance traveled by a Falcon booster in flight.

The same FCC filings also revealed a No Earlier Than (NET) launch date: March 7, 2019. Originally targeted for mid to late February, the complexity and logistical challenges of building, shipping, testing, and delivering two side boosters, a center core, one upper stage, and a payload fairing from SpaceX’s California factory to its Texas test facilities and Florida launch pad unsurprisingly took a small toll on the launch’s aspirational schedule. Nevertheless, if the launch data actually holds to March 7th, SpaceX will not have missed the mark by much considering that this Falcon Heavy – based on new and more powerful Block 5 boosters – is likely a significant departure from the Block 2/Block 3 hardware that has flight heritage from the triple-booster rocket’s Feb. 2018 launch debut.

Advertisement
-->
The second (and third) flight of Falcon Heavy is even closer to reality as a new side booster heads to Florida after finishing static fire tests in Texas. (Reddit /u/e32revelry)

Just shy of a year after Falcon Heavy’s launch debut, it appears that the rocket’s second and third launches were pushed back by a fundamental lack of production capacity. In other words, SpaceX’s Hawthorne rocket factory simply had to focus on more critical priorities in the 6-9 months that followed the demo mission. At nearly the same time as Falcon Heavy was lifting off for the first time, SpaceX’s world-class production crew was in the midst of manufacturing the first upgraded Falcon 9 Block 5 booster (B1046) and wrapped up final checkouts just 10 days after Heavy’s Feb. 6 launch debut, sending the pathfinder rocket to McGregor, Texas for the first static fire of a Block 5 booster.

In the meantime, SpaceX’s decision to intentionally expend otherwise recoverable reused Falcon boosters after their second launches meant that the company’s fleet of flightworthy rockets was rapidly approaching zero, a move CEO Elon Musk specifically indicated was meant to make room for Block 5, the future (and final form) of the Falcon family. SpaceX’s busy 2018 launch manifest and multiple critical missions for the US government were thus balanced on the success, reliability, and rapid production of a serious number of Merlin engines, boosters, and upper stages. This included B1051 – the first explicitly crew-rated Falcon 9 – and B1054, the first SpaceX rocket rated to launch high-value US military (specifically Air Force) satellites. However, SpaceX also needed to produce a cadre of Falcon 9 boosters capable of easy reuse to support the dozen or so other commercial launches on the manifest.

 

That gamble ultimately paid off, with Block 5 performing admirably and supporting a reasonable – if not record-breaking – rate of reuse. SpaceX successfully launched B1054 for the USAF, completed B1051 (now at Pad 39A awaiting NASA’s go-ahead), and built enough reusable Block 5 boosters to support nine additional commercial missions in 2018. In hindsight, barring an assumption of a truly miraculous and unprecedented Falcon booster production rate, Falcon Heavy’s next launches were almost guaranteed to occur no fewer than 6-12 months after the rocket’s launch debut – SpaceX’s entire launch business depended on building 5+ unrelated Falcon 9 boosters, while Falcon Heavy customers Arabsat and the USAF were unlikely to be swayed to launch on flight-proven hardware so early into Block 5’s career.

https://twitter.com/_TomCross_/status/1048483536917823488

All cylinders firing

Once Falcon 9 B1054 departed SpaceX’s Hawthorne factory (see above) in early October, it appears that the company’s production team pivoted directly to integrating and shipping the next three (or more) Falcon Heavy boosters back to back for the rocket’s second and third launches. The first new side booster departed the factory in mid-November, followed by a second side booster in early December and a (presumed but highly likely) center core at the turn of 2019. Both side boosters have been static-fired in Texas and are now at SpaceX’s Florida facilities, while the center core either just completed its Texas static fire testing or is already on its way East.

Advertisement
-->

 

Once the center core and upper stage make their way to SpaceX’s Kennedy Space Center Pad 39A, the company’s technicians and engineers will be able to integrate the second Falcon Heavy to have ever existed in preparation for a critical static fire test. That could occur as early as February, although the launch debut of Crew Dragon (DM-1) – now NET March from Pad 39A after a relentless string of slips – will likely take precedence over Falcon Heavy and could thus directly interfere with its launch, as the launch pad and transporter/erector (T/E) has to undergo at least a few days of modifications to switch between Falcon 9 and Heavy.

Regardless, the next two Falcon Heavy launches will be well worth the wait. SpaceX’s FCC filings indicate that the center core may travel nearly 1000 km (600 mi) East of Pad 39A to land on drone ship OCISLY after launch, smashing the previous record attempt – during the June 2016 launch of Eutelsat 117WB – of ~700 km (430 mi). That Falcon 9 booster – albeit a less-powerful Block 2 variant – was unsuccessful in its landing attempt, running out of oxidizer seconds before landing. Falcon Heavy’s debut center core also happened to suffer a wholly different but no less fatal anomaly during landing, causing it to miss the drone ship and slam into the Atlantic Ocean at almost half the speed of sound (300 mph/480 km/h).

Advertisement
-->

Known for their rocket performance estimates, NASASpaceflight forum user “Orbiter” first pointed out the impressive distance – gathered by mapping coordinates included in SpaceX’s Jan. 28th FCC filing – and estimated that the Falcon Heavy center booster flying a trajectory as implied could be traveling as fast as ~3.5 km/s (2.2 mi/s) at main engine cut-off (MECO), the point at which the booster separates from the upper stage and fairing. This would be a nearly unprecedented velocity for any Falcon booster, let alone a booster with plans to land after launch. Falcon 9 MECO typically occurs at velocities between 1.5 and 2.5 km/s for recoverable missions, while even the recent expendable GPS III launch saw F9 S1’s engines cut off around 2.7 km/s.

Whether that MECO velocity estimate is correct, Falcon Heavy’s NET March launch of the ~6000 kg (13,300 lb) Arabsat 6A satellite is likely to be an exceptionally hot reentry and recovery for the center core, while the rocket’s duo of side boosters will attempt a repeat of the debut mission’s spectacular double-landing at LZ-1.

Check out Teslarati’s newsletters for prompt updates, on-the-ground perspectives, and unique glimpses of SpaceX’s rocket launch and recovery processes!

Related Topics:

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

Tesla Model Y Standard: first impressions from a Premium owner

Published

2 hours ago

on

November 26, 2025

By

Credit: TESLARATI

Tesla was nice enough to hook us up with the new Model Y “Standard” trim for a few days, and while we’ll be sure to fill you in on the full experience in the coming days, there are a lot of differences we noticed right off the bat, which make the ownership experience different from the “Premium” configuration level.

I purchased a Model Y Long Range All-Wheel-Drive back in August and took delivery just two weeks later. Through the first three months of owning my car, I’ve come to love so many things about the Tesla experience.

I traded my ICE vehicle for a Tesla Model Y: here’s how it went

However, I was interested in experiencing the affordable trim and seeing whether I would miss any of the voided features of the “Premium” Model Y.

Through the first 24 hours, here are my first impressions of the Model Y Standard as a Premium trim level owner:

Advertisement
-->

Overall Aesthetic

The lack of a light bar is not something that is a dealbreaker. In fact, I would argue that the Model Y Standard’s more traditional headlight design is just as pleasing from an aesthetic standpoint.

The car is great looking from top to bottom; there are not a substantial number of differences besides the lack of a lightbar on both the front and the back of the car.

Overall, it is a very sleek vehicle, but the major changes are obviously with the interior.

Interior Changes

This is where the big differences are, and some of the things I’ve gotten used to in the Premium are not included. If I didn’t have a Premium Model Y already, I’m not sure I’d miss some of the things that are not present in the Standard trim, but I believe I’d get annoyed with it.

Storage

The Premium has a large storage compartment between the cupholders and the wireless charger, which is not present in the Standard trim. Instead, it is more like the Cybertruck, as there is a pass-through and floor storage.

I think that the pass-through is nice, but the additional storage is something I take advantage of, especially as someone who films Full Self-Driving videos, which requires hauling mounts, GoPros, and other accessories.

Advertisement
-->

The sleekness of the Premium trim is also something I prefer; I really enjoy having the ability to close those compartments and cover the cupholders.

Obviously, this is a really trivial issue and not something that is substantially impactful from an ownership experience. If I weren’t already an owner, I am not sure I’d even have something to complain about.

Material Differences

The Premium trim seats are completely Vegan Leather, which I really do like, even as someone who doesn’t really love leather seats due to their temperature dependency.

The Standard trim features a Textile and Vegan hybrid, which has half of the seat a different material than the other.

The material is very similar to what I had in my previous car, a Bronco Sport. It was very durable, easy to clean, dried quickly, and hid a lot of things that leather does not, like oils from your skin, which constantly require attention to keep your interior looking fresh.

Advertisement
-->

The wireless charger is also a different material, as the Premium features an Alcantara material on that. The Standard has a rubberized and textured backing, which looks good, too. They’re both more than suitable.

Other Missing Features

The Standard lacks a few minor things, most noticeably is the ambient lighting. The biggest change, however, and something I really miss, is the glass roof.

A lot of people told me that when I got my Model Y, I wouldn’t even notice the glass roof after a few weeks. That could not be further from the truth. I look out of it all the time, and it’s one of my family’s favorite parts of the car.

My Fiancè and I really love parking and watching Netflix when we pick food up, especially when it’s raining, because the glass roof gives such a great view.

We also loved it as Fall arrived, because it was great to look at the foliage.

Advertisement
-->

Bigger Differences

There are also a handful of very noticeable differences from the overall cabin experience, especially with the sound system.

Much Weaker Sound System

The Model Y Standard has just 7 speakers and 1 amp, with no subwoofer. This is a significant step down from the 13-15 speakers in the Premium Long Range AWD Model Y, the 2 amps it comes with, and 1 subwoofer in the trunk.

Advertisement
-->

I usually like to listen to Long Time by Boston to test out a sound system, and it was noticeably weaker in the Standard. It was missing a big portion of the umph that is provided by the Premium’s sound system.

Cabin Noise

It feels like the Cabin Noise is definitely more noticeable in the Standard, which is something I really love about my Model Y. It is able to dampen so much road noise from louder cars, and I don’t feel as if it is very quiet in the Standard.

This is perhaps the biggest make-or-break for me with this car. I truly have been spoiled by how quiet the cabin is in the Premium, and it’s due to the lack of acoustic-lined glass in the Standard.

I will be doing a more in-depth review of the Model Y Standard, especially with ride quality, later this week.

Advertisement
-->
Continue Reading

News

Tesla takes a step towards removal of Robotaxi service’s safety drivers

Tesla watchers are speculating that the implementation of in-camera data sharing could be a step towards the removal of the Robotaxi service’s safety drivers.

Published

4 hours ago

on

November 26, 2025

By

Credit: Tesla

Tesla appears to be preparing for the eventual removal of its Robotaxi service’s safety drivers. 

This was hinted at in a recent de-compile of the Robotaxi App’s version 25.11.5, which was shared on social media platform X. 

In-cabin analytics

As per Tesla software tracker @Tesla_App_iOS, the latest update to the Robotaxi app featured several improvements. These include Live Screen Sharing, as well as a feature that would allow Tesla to access video and audio inside the vehicle. 

According to the software tracker, a new prompt has been added to the Robotaxi App that requests user consent for enhanced in-cabin data sharing, which comprise Cabin Camera Analytics and Sound Detection Analytics. Once accepted, Tesla would be able to retrieve video and audio data from the Robotaxi’s cabin. 

Video and audio sharing

A screenshot posted by the software tracker on X showed that Cabin Camera Analytics is used to improve the intelligence of features like request support. Tesla has not explained exactly how the feature will be implemented, though this might mean that the in-cabin camera may be used to view and analyze the status of passengers when remote agents are contacted.

Advertisement
-->

Sound Detection Analytics is expected to be used to improve the intelligence of features like siren recognition. This suggests that Robotaxis will always be actively listening for emergency vehicle sirens to improve how the system responds to them. Tesla, however, also maintained that data collected by Robotaxis will be anonymous. In-cabin data will not be linked to users unless they are needed for a safety event or a support request. 

Tesla watchers are speculating that the implementation of in-camera data sharing could be a step towards the removal of the Robotaxi service’s safety drivers. With Tesla able to access video and audio feeds from Robotaxis, after all, users can get assistance even if they are alone in the driverless vehicle. 

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

Mizuho keeps Tesla (TSLA) “Outperform” rating but lowers price target

As per the Mizuho analyst, upcoming changes to EV incentives in the U.S. and China could affect Tesla’s unit growth more than previously expected.

Published

5 hours ago

on

November 26, 2025

By

Credit: Tesla China

Mizuho analyst Vijay Rakesh lowered Tesla’s (NASDAQ:TSLA) price target to $475 from $485, citing potential 2026 EV subsidy cuts in the U.S. and China that could pressure deliveries. The firm maintained its Outperform rating for the electric vehicle maker, however. 

As per the Mizuho analyst, upcoming changes to EV incentives in the U.S. and China could affect Tesla’s unit growth more than previously expected. The U.S. accounted for roughly 37% of Tesla’s third-quarter 2025 sales, while China represented about 34%, making both markets highly sensitive to policy shifts. Potential 50% cuts to Chinese subsidies and reduced U.S. incentives affected the firm’s outlook.

With those pressures factored in, the firm now expects Tesla to deliver 1.75 million vehicles in 2026 and 2 million in 2027, slightly below consensus estimates of 1.82 million and 2.15 million, respectively. The analyst was cautiously optimistic, as near-term pressure from subsidies is there, but the company’s long-term tech roadmap remains very compelling. 

Despite the revised target, Mizuho remained optimistic on Tesla’s long-term technology roadmap. The firm highlighted three major growth drivers into 2027: the broader adoption of Full Self-Driving V14, the expansion of Tesla’s Robotaxi service, and the commercialization of Optimus, the company’s humanoid robot. 

“We are lowering TSLA Ests/PT to $475 with Potential BEV headwinds in 2026E. We believe into 2026E, US (~37% of TSLA 3Q25 sales) EV subsidy cuts and China (34% of TSLA 3Q25 sales) potential 50% EV subsidy cuts could be a headwind to EV deliveries. 

Advertisement
-->

“We are now estimating TSLA deliveries for 2026/27E at 1.75M/2.00M (slightly below cons. 1.82M/2.15M). We see some LT drivers with FSD v14 adoption for autonomous, robotaxi launches, and humanoid robots into 2027 driving strength,” the analyst noted. 

Continue Reading