News
SpaceX’s next Falcon Heavy launch may feature record-breaking center core landing
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.
Of Course I Still Love You will be positioned a record ~965km downrange. That's nearly 300km further that the previous greatest distance of 681km, set during the Eutelsat-117WB mission in June 2016. (The landing was a failure, with the booster running out of LOX!) https://t.co/RECKjMtd37
— Gav Cornwell (@SpaceOffshore) January 28, 2019
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.
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.
-
- Falcon 9 B1046 is processed in Port of LA shortly after its third successful launch and landing, December 2018. (Pauline Acalin)
-
- Falcon 9 B1047 is pictured here beneath an upper stage and satellite Es’hail-2 prior to its second launch. (Tom Cross)
-
- Falcon 9 B1048 returned to Port of Los Angeles aboard drone ship Just Read The Instructions after its first launch. July 27. (Pauline Acalin)
-
- Falcon 9 B1049 returned to Port of Los Angeles after its second successful launch and landing in four months. (Pauline Acalin)
-
- Falcon 9 B1050 is seen here just after liftoff. GPS III SV01’s Falcon 9 will feature no grid fins or landing legs. ☹ (Tom Cross)
-
- Falcon 9 B1051 and Crew Dragon vertical at Pad 39A. (SpaceX)
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.
-
- SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy Block 5 side booster is pictured here in Texas in November 2018. (Teslarati/Aero Photo)
-
- 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)
-
- SpaceX Facebook group member Joshua Murrah captured the second Falcon Heavy side booster to arrive in Florida in the last month. (Joshua Murrah, 01/17/19)
-
- The next Falcon Heavy’s first side booster delivery was caught by several onlookers around December 21. (Instagram)
-
- A booster – likely the next Falcon Heavy center core – was vertical at McGregor’s S1 static fire stand. (Instagram /u/tcryguy)
-
- A booster – either Falcon Heavy’s next center core or a new Falcon 9 – was vertical at SpaceX’s McGregor, TX test facilities on Jan 28. (Instagram /u/n75sd)
-
- A diagram from a recent SpaceX document offers an idea of what Falcon Heavy Block 5 will look like. (SpaceX)
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).
Looks like early liquid oxygen depletion caused engine shutdown just above the deck pic.twitter.com/Sa6uCkpknY
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 17, 2016
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.
The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) has awarded the 2025-2026 Tesla Cybertruck crew cab pickup its highest honor: Top Safety Pick+. This marks the Cybertruck as the only full-size pickup to achieve this distinction in recent evaluations.
The award applies specifically to vehicles built after April 2025, following structural upgrades including front underbody reinforcements and footwell modifications.
These changes enabled strong performance in updated crash tests. The Cybertruck earned “Good” ratings in the small overlap front (driver and passenger sides), updated moderate overlap front, and updated side tests—core requirements for the Top Safety Pick+ designation.
It also secured acceptable or good headlights across trims and a “Good” rating for its standard front crash prevention system in pedestrian scenarios, along with acceptable or good performance in vehicle-to-vehicle testing.
The Cybertruck avoided every single pedestrian collision, including:
- Daytime child crossing
- Nightitime adult crossing
- Night parallel adult
In IIHS pedestrian front crash prevention tests, @Cybertruck avoided every single collision – daytime, nighttime & different angles
It was also the only pickup to earn Top Safety Pick+ (highest award) in 2026https://t.co/BNPqT9TbsW pic.twitter.com/M6nwDisBFK
— Tesla (@Tesla) June 24, 2026
In the large pickup category, competitors such as the Toyota Tundra received only a standard Top Safety Pick, while the Ford F-150 and Ram 1500 did not qualify for either award. This positions the Cybertruck as a standout in occupant protection and crash avoidance among its peers.
Credit: IIHS
Ironically, the same vehicle celebrated for superior U.S. safety performance remains banned from public roads in the United Kingdom and much of Europe. Regulators there cite the Cybertruck’s sharp external edges and highly rigid stainless-steel construction as failing pedestrian-protection standards. European and UK rules require rounded surfaces on protruding parts to minimize injury risk in collisions with vulnerable road users.
Critics also point to the truck’s substantial weight and unyielding body structure, which some argue could transfer more force to other vehicles or pedestrians rather than absorbing it.
Tesla’s engineering philosophy underpins the Cybertruck’s strong IIHS results. The vehicle features a distinctive stainless-steel exoskeleton made from ultra-hard 30X cold-rolled stainless steel. This provides exceptional structural rigidity and a robust safety cage that resists deformation in side impacts and rollovers.
Engineers designed integrated load paths to channel crash forces away from the occupant compartment while allowing controlled energy absorption in key zones. Post-April 2025 refinements to the front underbody further optimized performance in overlap crashes.
Complementing the passive structure is Tesla’s advanced active safety suite, including the standard Collision Avoidance Assist system with automatic emergency braking. This contributed directly to the vehicle’s strong front crash prevention scores. The skateboard platform and low center of gravity also enhance stability and handling, reducing the likelihood of certain crashes.
The IIHS recognition highlights how Tesla’s combination of high-strength materials, structural innovation, and software-driven safety systems can deliver top-tier protection in rigorous testing. While global regulatory differences on design and pedestrian interaction continue to limit the Cybertruck’s availability outside North America, its U.S. safety credentials set a new benchmark for full-size pickups.
Elon Musk
SpaceX’s newest Starmind will make earth data centers obsolete
Elon Musk confirmed Starmind as SpaceX’s AI satellite constellation name, targeting one million orbital compute nodes.
Elon Musk confirmed that Starmind will be the official name of SpaceX’s planned AI satellite constellation, following a trademark filing by xAI that surfaced earlier this week. Starmind is what’s being described to the FCC as a constellation of up to one million AI satellites
It’s worth noting that SpaceX’s Starlink communication satellite and Starmind are built on the same orbital infrastructure concept but serve entirely different purposes. Starlink is a connectivity network, with satellites receiving and relaying data between points on Earth, and functioning as a high-speed internet backbone in space. The satellites themselves do not process or think, and move information from one place to another, the same function a fiber cable performs underground.
SpaceX just forced Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile to team up for the first time in history
Starmind, on the other hand, is something completely different, and tather than moving data, its satellites would compute data through artificial intelligence and directly in orbit using onboard processors powered by large solar arrays. Where a Starlink satellite is essentially a very fast pipe, a Starmind satellite is a server. The practical implication is that Starmind would allow AI models to run inference, process queries, and generate outputs from space, then beam results down to users anywhere on Earth within milliseconds, and without the data ever needing to travel to a terrestrial data center.
Starship will be able to carry 30 to 50 AI1 satellites per launch, delivering the equivalent of dozens of server racks per flight, with no land acquisition, no power grid approval, and no cooling infrastructure required on the ground.
SpaceX is pursuing this new technology as terrestrial data centers are running into hard limits such as lack of physical space, community opposition, and power and water consumption at a scale that is increasingly difficult to permit. Space has unlimited solar power, natural vacuum cooling, and no zoning boards. Musk said in a June 8 video presentation that he expects space to become the lowest-cost location to deploy AI compute within two to three years. Two AI1 prototypes are scheduled to launch in early 2027, with volume production targeted for the end of that year at a new facility called Gigasat.
The real world applications Starmind enables extend well beyond powering Grok. A constellation of orbiting AI processors could run inference workloads for any paying customer, anywhere on Earth, with latency measured in milliseconds rather than the seconds associated with ground-based cloud routing across continents. Starmind, if it scales as described, would make SpaceX the landlord of AI compute the same way Starlink made it the landlord of satellite internet.
Tesla is pushing back against the unfair reporting of accidents involving its vehicles. Many media outlets were quick to jump to conclusions about a fatal accident involving a Tesla in Katy, Texas, that happened recently.
The driver of the vehicle, which slammed into a brick house and killed a woman inside, stated the car was operating on Autopilot. Tesla CEO Elon Musk and Head of AI Ashok Elluswamy both challenged that claim, with Elluswamy revealing last night that the system was overridden by the driver, who pressed the accelerator pedal “all the way to 100%.”
Tesla finally clarifies fatal Texas crash, confirms driver manually overrode acceleration
The car reached a speed of 73 MPH during the crash, Elluswamy detailed, and stated that the accelerator pedal was even pressed after the crash.
The story has been spread throughout the media with either incomplete or incorrect reporting, with some stories still not updated nearly 24 hours after Musk and Elluswamy posted answers about the crash on X.
The reporting has been a thorn in the side of Tesla for several years. Vehicle accidents involving Teslas are usually reported with the manufacturer’s name in the headline, while other companies are free of criticism when their cars are involved in accidents.
Here’s an example of that:
So you don’t report the vehicle’s make when it isn’t a Tesla, but you do report it when it is a Tesla?
The vehicle in your post above is a Hyundai Ioniq 5 EV. pic.twitter.com/4WT3sZ2DHm
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) February 17, 2026
Many media outlets stated the car was in “self-driving mode” or “Autopilot mode” when the car crashed. The truth is, now that Tesla has chimed in, that the driver had manually overriden the system by pressing the accelerator. Elluswamy commented on the unfair reporting:
“This blatantly irresponsible reporting does more harm to people than they realize.
Using Tesla self-driving is far safer than manual driving, and this was measured over 10B miles.
Planting such FUD in the minds of general public, who might not know the all the facts, might prevent them from using this technology that makes them safer.”
This blatantly irresponsible reporting does more harm to people than they realize.
Using Tesla self-driving is far safer than manual driving, and this was measured over 10B miles.
Planting such FUD in the minds of general public, who might not know the all the facts, might…
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
The damage these headlines do to Tesla and the self-driving car movement is unexplainable. Most people do not realize the safeguards that are in place with Tesla’s self-driving functions; many people who have used it know the car would never travel at that speed in a residential area, not even on the most aggressive “Mad Max” setting.
It is important to remember that Tesla Full Self-Driving is not autonomous, and the company never claimed it was. Drivers are still responsible for paying attention and remaining vigilant. They must be able to take over at all times.
Tesla Cybertruck is officially the safest pickup, IIHS says
SpaceX’s newest Starmind will make earth data centers obsolete
