News
SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket nails first operational NASA astronaut launch [updated]
Update: SpaceX has successfully resolved a handful of minor thermal control issues facing the brand new Crew Dragon capsule currently ferrying four astronauts in low Earth orbit (LEO).
As previously noted, shortly after the spacecraft reached orbit, two redundant thermal control system pumps registered pressure spikes, pushing Crew Dragon to use the backup pump. SpaceX was able to resolve that issue, effectively restarting the pumps and confirming healthy operation. Several hours later, the backup pump (“Loop B”) suffered another minor issue but was again returned to healthy operations. Simultaneously, Crew-1 astronauts found themselves stuck at an (admittedly comfortable) cabin temperature of 23C (~73F).
More pressingly, three of four heaters used to warm the propellant fed to Crew Dragon’s small Draco maneuvering and attitude control thrusters were automatically disabled a few hours after liftoff. Essential for most operations in orbit and necessary for Dragon to be allowed to remain docked with the ISS, restoring the functionality of at least one of the three heaters was essential, and SpaceX was thankfully able to restore function to all three by relaxing excessively conservative limits in the spacecraft’s flight software. Thanks to SpaceX’s fast work, Dragon is now in perfect health and ready for two crucial Draco burns at 11:20 am and 12 pm EST (UTC-5) on Monday, November 16th and is still scheduled to arrive at the ISS around 11 pm EST.
Right on schedule, a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket has successfully lifted off on the company’s operational NASA astronaut launch debut, sending four crew members on their way to the International Space Station (ISS) in a historic moment for commercial spaceflight.
Days prior, NASA and SpaceX completed a multi-day “flight readiness review (FRR),” the results of which made SpaceX the first private company in human history to be qualified by a national space agency for routine astronaut launches. As is now more or less routine, the SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket assigned to NASA’s Crew-1 mission performed flawlessly over the 12 minutes it was involved in the launch, including nominal booster and upper stage performance, a successful booster landing at sea, and a smooth Dragon deployment from Falcon 9’s expendable second stage.
In a small point of concern, Crew Dragon capsule C207 (colloquially named Dragon Resilience by its crew) appeared to suffer a minor hardware or software fault shortly after orbital insertion, offering the first public glimpse behind the scenes as ground teams coordinated with Dragon’s orbiting astronaut crew to diagnose and fix the issue.
According to information revealed by SpaceX and NASA officials as they interacted with Crew-1 NASA astronauts Mike Hopkins, Victor Glover, Shannon Walker, and Japanese (JAXA) astronaut Soichi Noguchi, Crew Dragon’s fault detection software was tripped sometime after reaching orbit. Both thermal control system (TCS) “loop” pumps – likely referring to pumps used to circulate a liquid-based radiator system to maintain capsule temperature – experienced off-nominal pressure spikes, causing the spacecraft computer to switch to the second pump (“Loop B”).
As SpaceX’s main earth-to-ground communications team member (CapCom) noted, the TCS pump issue was far from critical given that both pumps appeared to be healthy – and one of those two redundant pumps functioning healthily – moments after Dragon alerted its passengers to the issue. Deemed to be not a showstopper, SpaceX continued the mission and permitted Crew Dragon to begin its first orbit-raising thruster burn – the first of a fairly complex series of ‘phasing’ burns needed to safely rendezvous with the International Space Station (ISS).
Unfortunately, due to a 24-hour weather delay from November 14th to November 15th, the complexities of orbital rendezvous mean that Crew Dragon’s Crew-1 mission to the ISS will involve a roughly day-long cruise phase. Had SpaceX been able to launch on the 14th, the cruise phase would have been just 8.5 hours long – perhaps the fastest crewed US space station rendezvous ever. Crew-1 will thus align quite closely with SpaceX’s Demo-2 astronaut launch debut, although likely not interspersed with manual astronaut piloting tests this time around.
On top of Crew Dragon’s thus far successful performance, Falcon 9 also completed a task critical for future Crew Dragon launches when new booster B1061 safely landed aboard SpaceX drone ship Of Course I Still Love You (OCISLY). While normally a distinctly secondary objective, booster recovery was all but essential for SpaceX and NASA during the Crew-1 launch after NASA’s recent reveal that B1061 has been assigned to launch Crew-2 as early as March 31st, 2021. In the likely event that the Falcon 9 booster is in good condition and NASA signs off after shadowing SpaceX’s refurbishment process, SpaceX will also become the first private company in history to launch astronauts into orbit on a flight-proven rocket booster. Additionally, thanks to plans to reuse Crew Dragon capsule C206 of Demo-2 fame, Crew-2 will also mark the first time in history that US astronauts launch into orbit in a reused space capsule.
If the Crew-1 cruise phases goes according to plan, Crew Dragon will autonomously ferry Hopkins, Glover, Walker, and Noguchi from a ~200 km (~125 mi) parking orbit to the International Space Station (ISS) between now and Monday, November 16th, nominally docking with the space station around 11 pm EST (04:00 UTC 17 Nov). From liftoff to reentry, Crew-1 is expected to be the longest continuous spaceflight of a US spacecraft in American history, spending approximately six months in orbit. For JAXA astronaut Soichi Noguchi, his Crew-1 launch also made him the third astronaut in human history to fly to orbit on three separate vehicles.
Ultimately, for SpaceX, the company has never been closer to achieving its foundational goal of enabling the affordable expansion of humanity into space than it is after today’s successful Crew-1 launch.
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.
The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.
Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:
“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”
The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:
“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”
Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
