Connect with us

News

SpaceX’s partial Falcon 9 landing failure could delay next West Coast launch

Wait, that's not supposed to be there... (Tom Cross)

Published

8 years ago

on

According to statements made by the Canadian Space Agency (CSA) and media outlet CBC, the launch of the agency’s next-generation Radarsat Constellation Mission (RCM) – a trio of Earth observation satellites weighing >4200 kg (9300 lbs) – has been “postponed … indefinitely” as a consequence of SpaceX’s first failed Falcon 9 booster landing since 2016.

Offering a rare glimpse into some of the extensive planning that goes on behind the scenes to make commercial rocket launches happen, CSA has indicated that the booster it planned to launch on – Falcon 9 B1050 – suffered an untimely (partial) demise during a recovery attempt shortly after successfully launching the CRS-16 Cargo Dragon mission on December 5th, 2018. While the booster shockingly was returned to dry land mostly intact after landing in the Atlantic, SpaceX and CSA must now settle on a different Falcon 9 to launch the mission.

Goldilocks and the Falcon boosters

While it doesn’t look like there are only three possible rocket options for the Radarsat constellation and SpaceX to choose from, the situation of picking a new booster this late in the launch flow is far less simple than it might initially seem. First and foremost, SpaceX likely needs to do its best to accommodate the preferences of customers CSA and MDA (MacDonald, Dettwiler and Associates Ltd.) regardless of how disruptive they may be. Originally targeted for sometime in November 2018, RCM’s launch slipped several months to the second half of February 2019 due to what CSA described as “higher priority missions [for]the US Government and a backlog of launches from…Vandenberg” late last year.

While that alone does not point directly towards any obvious explanations, CBC reporter Dean Beeby’s implication that the mission’s launch is now “postponed…indefinitely” offers a hint of an answer, although it could also be manufactured hyperbole where there actually is none. If CSA actually indicated that the launch is now postponed indefinitely, the only clear explanation for a launch delay greater than a month or so as a result of Falcon 9 B1050’s unplanned unavailability would lie in some unique aspect of that particular Falcon 9 booster.

Advertisement
-
-

Although each rocket SpaceX builds can be quite different from each other in terms of general quirks and bugs, the only obvious difference between B1050 and any other flight-proven Falcon 9 booster in SpaceX’s fleet was its low-energy CRS-16 trajectory, something that would have enabled a uniquely gentle reentry and landing shortly after launch. In other words, likely out of heaps of caution and conservatism if it is the case, customers CSA and MDA may have requested (or contractually demanded) that SpaceX launch the Radarsat constellation on a flight-proven Falcon 9 with as little wear and tear as possible, in which case B1050 would have been hard to beat.

“Unfortunately, the landing of [Falcon 9 B1050] was unsuccessful, preventing SpaceX from recuperating the reusable components for the launch of RCM. We continue to work closely with MDA and SpaceX to confirm a launch date for RCM.” – Spokesperson Audrey Barbier, Canadian Space Agency (CSA), 01/15/2019

If the customers remained steadfast in their (speculated) request for a gently-used flight-proven Falcon 9 even after B1050’s partial landing failure, the next most comparable booster would be Falcon 9 B1051 after launching the first orbital Crew Dragon mission sometime no earlier than (NET) February 2019. Aside from B1051, there will be no obvious booster alternative available for at least several months after Crew Dragon’s launch debut, unless NASA requests that its next contracted Cargo Dragon mission (CRS-17) launch on a new Falcon 9 rocket in March 2019.

Warmer…

If a less lightly-used booster becomes an option for CSA/MDA, there are immediately multiple clear options available as long as SpaceX is will to accept possible delays to subsequent launches to quickly reassign a flight-proven Falcon 9. Falcon 9 B1046 – the first SpaceX rocket ever to launch three orbital-class missions – is being refurbished at SpaceX’s Hawthorne, California facilities a few hundred miles south of Vandenberg. B1047 completed its second successful launch in November 2018 and is being refurbished – along with the twice-flown B1048 – in Cape Canaveral, Florida. Finally, Falcon 9 B1049 completed its second successful launch just days ago (January 11th) and is being processed off of drone ship Just Read The Instructions (JRTI) at this very moment.

B1047 or B1048 have likely been assigned to the imminent NET February 18th launch of Indonesian commsat PSN-6 and SpaceIL’s Beresheet Moon lander, meaning that the best possible option for Radarsat – short of swallowing months of additional delays – is a decision between B1047/B1048 or B1046, with B1049 also a candidate if a slip into March or April is an option. Still, all of those options would require Canada and MDA to fly on a Falcon 9’s third (or fourth) launch, perhaps an unacceptable compromise or perceived risk for certain customers.

 

Advertisement
-
-

Meanwhile, schedule pressures have meant that SpaceX is pushing as hard as possible to prepare three new Block 5 Falcon Heavy boosters for the giant rocket’s second and third launches, scheduled as early as March and April 2019. While unconfirmed, it appears that SpaceX may have chosen to manufacture all three of those boosters one after the other, meaning that the company’s Hawthorne factory would have been primarily focused on delivering those rockets for at least 2-3 months start to finish. In short, it does not appear that there is or will be an unflown Falcon 9 booster available for Radarsat anytime soon.

Whether the customers wait for a new booster to be produced, wait for Crew Dragon’s first launch to wrap up, or accept being the third or fourth launch of a well-scorched Falcon 9, RCM’s next published launch target should offer a hint as to how CSA, MDA, and SpaceX ultimately decided to respond to Falcon 9 B1050’s dip in the Atlantic OCean.

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

Investor's Corner

SpaceX reports beat in first earnings while minimizing losses

Published

1 hour ago

on

August 4, 2026

By

Credit: SpaceX | X

SpaceX (NASDAQ: SPCX) reported a beat in revenues and EBITDA in its first earnings call report while also minimizing losses as its business continues to gain momentum.

After its IPO in July, SpaceX saw some tough losses on Wall Street due to a major selloff after a delay in its 13th Starship test flight. The ship launched later that week and completed what was arguably the most successful IFT operation in the Starship program’s history.

Nevertheless, the company is continuing on and reported some encouraging financials while also promoting what appears to be a robust outlook moving forward in its Space, AI, and Connectivity divisions.

SpaceX to report first-ever earnings today: here’s what to expect

Earnings Results

  • Revenues: $7.8 billion reported vs. $6.7 billion expected
  • Adjusted EBITDA: $3.5 billion vs. $2 billion expected
  • Net loss of $541 million, an improvement of $467 million from net loss of $1.0 billion

Additionally, CFO Bret Johnsen had these comments:

“2026 has been a momentous year so far, and the second quarter demonstrated the true power of SpaceX. Revenue growth accelerated across all our business segments and we delivered strong operating leverage, with significant margin expansion led by our new AI compute agreements. Our unparalleled leadership in launch, Starlink subscriber growth, new enterprise and government partnerships, and best-in-class AI infrastructure underscore our ability to drive meaningful scale and deliver attractive returns. As a newly public company, we are delighted to welcome our broad base of shareholders and bondholders. We ended the second quarter with $100 billion of cash, cash equivalents, and marketable securities, and $47.5 billion in backlog. This financial strength gives us substantial capacity to invest in Starship, Starlink Broadband and Mobile satellites, and our AI platform, while maintaining a disciplined long-term capital allocation framework.”

Space Business Highlights

SpaceX shared some of its biggest Space Business Highlights for Q2:

  • Space revenues grew 55% sequentially and 29% year-over-year to $962 million, driven by a higher number of large customer launches and a favorable customer shift compared to the prior year
  • Total costs and expenses for the Space segment were up by $389 million year-over-year, as we continued to accelerate R&D investments in our Starship program, which we believe will reduce the cost to orbit by 99% or more relative to the historical average, and unlock significant revenue potential across all business segments
  • Leading launch provider for the world with 78 launches and 1,041 metric tons of mass to orbit deployed over the six months ended June 30, 2026, primarily allocated to Connectivity for the deployment of our Starlink constellation
  • Starship V3 development continued to advance towards full and rapid reusability:
    • Completed Starship V3’s first suborbital mission in May, Flight 12, which achieved a successful lift off from our new Starbase pad, a precision landing of Starship’s upper stage, and deployment of modified V2 Starlink satellites
    • Subsequent to the second quarter, completed Starship Flight 13 in July, which achieved all flight objectives including deploying 20 production V3 satellites, demonstrating in-space relight of a Raptor engine, and executing the softest ever splashdown of Starship, providing critical views of an intact heatshield

SpaceX will report its earnings today at 4:30 P.M. EDT.

Advertisement
-
-
Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Elon Musk sends second warning to SpaceX shorts ahead of first earnings

Published

2 hours ago

on

August 4, 2026

By

Credit: Grok Imagine

Elon Musk issued a second pointed warning to SpaceX short sellers on Tuesday, just hours before the company was set to release its first quarterly earnings as a publicly traded firm. Responding to a report highlighting elevated short interest, Musk wrote on X: “I try to warn them, but they just double down …”

The comment came as data from S3 Partners showed roughly 95 percent of available SPCX shares to borrow were on loan, translating to about 34 percent short interest as a percentage of the float. The stock has traded under pressure since its record-breaking IPO in June 2026, declining significantly from early peaks.

This marks the second such message from Musk in under three weeks.

On July 17, amid post-IPO volatility, he stated: “The survival probability of firms who maintain a significant short position in SpaceX over time is very low.” At that time, SPCX had fallen roughly 30 percent from its peak above a $2.6 trillion valuation, with short sellers reportedly realizing gains of about $8.7 billion.

Elon Musk sends first warning to SpaceX short sellers

Advertisement
-
-

Musk’s warning aligned with optimistic analyses projecting that Starship-driven cost reductions could enable a multi-trillion-dollar space economy through applications such as orbital solar power, asteroid mining, data centers, and Mars-related projects, positioning SpaceX as critical infrastructure.

SpaceX is scheduled to report second-quarter results after the market close later today, followed by a webcast. Analysts anticipate revenue near $6.9 billion, reflecting growth in Starlink, launch services, and AI-related segments. The earnings release precedes a major lockup expiration on August 6 that could free hundreds of millions of insider shares.

Musk has a long track record of confronting short sellers, particularly regarding Tesla, where he has argued that persistent bearish positions underestimate transformative technologies. Critics view his optimism as overly ambitious given near-term stock fluctuations, while supporters see temporary dips as opportunities in a longer-term expansion of the space economy.

As SpaceX opens its books to public scrutiny for the first time, the high short interest and Musk’s repeated cautions set the stage for heightened market attention on the results and management’s commentary.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla’s AI lead doubles down on FSD’s speed strategy, and owners are confused

Published

5 hours ago

on

August 4, 2026

By

Credit: Tesla

Tesla’s AI lead Ashok Elluswamy doubled down on the company’s strategy regarding Full Self-Driving’s speed settings, and owners are definitely confused.

Earlier versions of Full Self-Driving allowed owners to set a max speed that the vehicle could travel while operating under the semi-autonomous driver assistance platform. This allowed more customization for the driver, giving them the ability to experience FSD’s robust performance with their own personal preferences.

Speed is massively important for obvious reasons — it’s not only a question of keeping the vehicle occupants comfortable by traveling at a safe speed, but it’s also something that could contribute to a ticket or infraction from law enforcement.

With the release of FSD v14 last year, Tesla removed the ability to set a max speed and instead opted for five Speed Profiles, ranging from “Sloth,” the most conservative, to “Mad Max,” the most aggressive and spirited. These profiles not only control speed, but also how frequently the vehicle will execute passes, perform lane changes, and other contributing factors.

The removal of the Max Speed setting was a major complaint amongst the Tesla community because it left owners scrambling for a way to experience suitable behaviors while traveling at an appropriate speed. Most felt the driving profiles would be a good indicator of the behaviors, while speed would still be left up to the discretion of the driver.

Instead, Tesla’s Speed Profiles determine both, and the constant tinkering of how they behave has been a major bottleneck and point of confusion for both owners and the company. From update to update, the Speed Profiles will change, sometimes more drastically than others. Some owners have complained that the “Standard” profile is too fast, while others have experienced “Mad Max” traveling below the speed limit:

These things change with each update, but the big complaint is that owners are on the hook for any tickets that come from FSD’s infractions; that’s the caveat of the suite being named FSD (Supervised). It ultimately means the driver is responsible, and the automaker has no liability when it comes to speeding tickets or general traffic infractions.

It is the driver’s responsibility to take over or adjust based on this.

Elluswamy essentially confirmed that there are no plans to bring back Max Speed control, because it is what he referred to as “an anti pattern.” He then echoed something that CEO Elon Musk has started to really push with FSD, and that’s the idea that Tesla is really honing in on the preferences of the driver.

Owners were confused by Tesla’s decision, stating that there must be a better way, especially considering disengagements for incorrect speeds are common:

From personal experience and using FSD for over 72 percent of my driving miles since v14 was released late last year, I make Speed Profile adjustments constantly. If FSD is traveling a tad too quickly, I will scale it back, and if it’s too conservative, I’ll make it more aggressive.

I don’t complain about making the Speed Profile changes too frequently, but it would certainly be nice to have it happen less frequently. There are far too many times I am concerned about getting a ticket, even in Standard mode.

The biggest issue for me, personally, which seems to be echoed throughout the community, is the fact that Tesla’s goal is to minimize disengagements. Many drivers are stating that speed is a major reason for disengagements.

However, Tesla is not willing to bring back this one level of input because it would technically be a regression.

Advertisement
-
-

Whether it’s right or wrong in your opinion, it is what Tesla is going with, and it seems like it has pivoted quite a bit from its other strategies for minimizing interventions by pushing its AI to behave in a way that would fit the occupant’s personal preferences.

Continue Reading