News
SpaceX preparing for an inaugural Falcon Heavy launch in November
All three Falcon Heavy cores are believed to be at Cape Canaveral
As we inch closer to SpaceX returning to a regular launch schedule, evidence is adding up that Falcon Heavy is fast approaching launch readiness.
Over at SpaceX’s Cape Canaveral facilities, workers are busily modifying LC-39A and are deep into the reconstruction and reactivation of LC-40, which was severely damaged just over 11 months ago. Members of the SpaceX fan community have taken regular tours of the Kennedy Space Center and offered glimpses into part of the process as workers relentlessly dismantle previous LC-39A pad structures.
-
- During a month without launches, SpaceX has made considerable progress dismantling parts of LC-39A. The main focus right now is the RSS, which is the skeletal structure on the left. (Brian Bundridge/Facebook)
-
- One of Falcon Heavy’s side boosters seen arriving at LC-39A about a month ago. (Reddit /u/MajorRocketScience)
Before SpaceX, the pad hosted the first manned launches of the vast Saturn V rocket and hosted the launch of Apollo 11, which landed the first humans on the Moon in 1969. Decades later, that same pad was recycled for the Space Shuttle and supported dozens of Shuttle launches. SpaceX is deep into the process of dismantling the old pad structures used for the Shuttle, and Elon Musk has recently reported that the Rolling Service Structure (RSS) is expected to be entirely removed before the first launch of Falcon Heavy. While bittersweet for many observers, LC-39A will eventually host both the return of massive rockets to the U.S., as well as the first American-supported launch of crew to the ISS in more than six years.
With this progress, we find ourselves in the pleasantly foreign situation of SpaceX beating one of Musk’s aggressive schedules. In early June, he tweeted about Falcon Heavy cores arriving at the Cape within two or three months. Surprisingly, it has been confirmed that three of three Falcon Heavy cores are already at LC-39A and have been for at least a week or two. At the moment, pad readiness is the main constraint for its inaugural launch. SpaceX is preparing for a period of pad gymnastics as they ready LC-40 to take over for LC-39A. Once this happens, all Falcon 9 launches will be transferred over to LC-40, and this will allow SpaceX workers to conduct necessary modifications to LC-39A’s launch hardware in preparation for Falcon Heavy. These modifications are expected to take about two months.
All Falcon Heavy cores should be at the Cape in two to three months, so launch should happen a month after that
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 8, 2017
-->
Current best guesses peg the first launch from LC-40 in late August or sometime in September, fitting nicely with Musk’s Falcon Heavy launch estimate of November. Falcon Heavy will nevertheless likely require several weeks of fit checks, wet dress rehearsals (like a static fire but without the ignition), and one or several static fires before its first official launch attempt. While Musk has recently been on a warpath of expectation management for Falcon Heavy, going so far as to imply that a failure was a likely outcome, let there be no doubt that SpaceX and Musk will privately do everything realistically possible to ensure a safe launch. If major issues are discovered during pre-launch testing, SpaceX will almost certainly scrub the launch indefinitely.
However, if Falcon Heavy does indeed lift off above a more controlled fireball later this year, fans can look forward to what will be a stunning show of force. Musk once again confirmed that both side cores will land at LZ-1, SpaceX’s land-based landing facilities, and the center core will land on Of Course I Still Live You somewhere in the Pacific. While not guaranteed, Musk’s myriad comments on the spectacular nature of the launch mean that SpaceX’s live coverage will offer some truly incredibly views. Fans have long eagerly anticipated the synchronized landings of the side cores, as well as possible live shots of booster separation during the launch.
-
- NASASpaceflight’s famed graphic designer okan170 has produced multiple gorgeous renders of Falcon Heavy over the years. (NASASpaceflight)
-
- NASASpaceflight’s famed graphic designer okan170 has produced multiple gorgeous renders of Falcon Heavy over the years. (NASASpaceflight)
At the ISSR&D Conference, Musk reiterated the fact that SpaceX’s primary focus is preparation for Commercial Crew. LC-39A is needed for SpaceX’s crewed launches, so it is highly unlikely that the company will risk a Falcon Heavy launch if there is anything more than the slimmest of chances of the pad being lost in a launch failure. Regardless of the outcome, as Musk himself has often said, Falcon Heavy’s inaugural launch is guaranteed to be a spectacle.
-->
Tesla recently released Full Self-Driving (FSD) v14.2.1, its latest version, but the tinkering with Speed Profiles has perhaps gone too far.
We try to keep it as real as possible with Full Self-Driving operation, and we are well aware that with the new versions, some things get better, but others get worse. It is all part of the process with FSD, and refinements are usually available within a week or so.
However, the latest v14.2.1 update has brought out some major complaints with Speed Profiles, at least on my end. It seems the adjustments have gone a tad too far, and there is a sizeable gap between Profiles that are next to one another.
Tesla FSD v14.2.1 first impressions:
✅ Smooth, stress-free highway operation
✅ Speed Profiles are refined — Hurry seems to be limited to 10 MPH over on highways. Switching from Mad Max to Hurry results in an abrupt braking pattern. Nothing of concern but do feel as if Speed…— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) November 29, 2025
The gap is so large that changing between them presents a bit of an unwelcome and drastic reduction in speed, which is perhaps a tad too fast for my liking. Additionally, Speed Profiles seem to have a set Speed Limit offset, which makes it less functional in live traffic situations.
Before I go any further, I’d like to remind everyone reading this that what I am about to write is purely my opinion; it is not right or wrong, or how everyone might feel. I am well aware that driving behaviors are widely subjective; what is acceptable to one might be unacceptable to another.
Speed Profiles are ‘Set’ to a Speed
From what I’ve experienced on v14.2.1, Tesla has chosen to go with somewhat of a preset max speed for each Speed Profile. With ‘Hurry,’ it appears to be 10 MPH over the speed limit, and it will not go even a single MPH faster than that. In a 55 MPH zone, it will only travel 65 MPH. Meanwhile, ‘Standard’ seems to be fixed at between 4-5 MPH over.
This is sort of a tough thing to have fixed, in my opinion. The speed at which the car travels should not be fixed; it should be more dependent on how traffic around it is traveling.
-->It almost seems as if the Speed Profile chosen should be more of a Behavior Profile. Standard should perform passes only to traffic that is slower than the traffic. If traffic is traveling at 75 MPH in a 65 MPH zone, the car should travel at 75 MPH. It should pass traffic that travels slower than this.
Hurry should be more willing to overtake cars, travel more than 10 MPH over the limit, and act as if someone is in a hurry to get somewhere, hence the name. Setting strict limits on how fast it will travel seems to be a real damper on its capabilities. It did much better in previous versions.
Some Speed Profiles are Too Distant from Others
This is specifically about Hurry and Mad Max, which are neighbors in the Speed Profiles menu. Hurry will only go 10 MPH over the limit, but Mad Max will travel similarly to traffic around it. I’ve seen some people say Mad Max is too slow, but I have not had that opinion when using it.
In a 55 MPH zone during Black Friday and Small Business Saturday, it is not unusual for traffic around me to travel in the low to mid-80s. Mad Max was very suitable for some traffic situations yesterday, especially as cars were traveling very fast. However, sometimes it required me to “gear down” into Hurry, especially as, at times, it would try to pass slower traffic in the right lane, a move I’m not super fond of.
We had some readers also mention this to us:
-->The abrupt speed reduction when switching to a slower speed profile is definitely an issue that should be improved upon.
— David Klem (@daklem) November 29, 2025
After switching from Mad Max to Hurry, there is a very abrupt drop in speed. It is not violent by any means, but it does shift your body forward, and it seems as if it is a tad drastic and could be refined further.
-->News
Tesla’s most affordable car is coming to the Netherlands
The trim is expected to launch at €36,990, making it the most affordable Model 3 the Dutch market has seen in years.
Tesla is preparing to introduce the Model 3 Standard to the Netherlands this December, as per information obtained by AutoWeek. The trim is expected to launch at €36,990, making it the most affordable Model 3 the Dutch market has seen in years.
While Tesla has not formally confirmed the vehicle’s arrival, pricing reportedly comes from a reliable source, the publication noted.
Model 3 Standard lands in NL
The U.S. version of the Model 3 Standard provides a clear preview of what Dutch buyers can expect, such as a no-frills configuration that maintains the recognizable Model 3 look without stripping the car down to a bare interior. The panoramic glass roof is still there, the exterior design is unchanged, and Tesla’s central touchscreen-driven cabin layout stays intact.
Cost reductions come from targeted equipment cuts. The American variant uses fewer speakers, lacks ventilated front seats and heated rear seats, and swaps premium materials for cloth and textile-heavy surfaces. Performance is modest compared with the Premium models, with a 0–100 km/h sprint of about six seconds and an estimated WLTP range near 550 kilometers.
Despite the smaller battery and simpler suspension, the Standard maintains the long-distance capability drivers have come to expect in a Tesla.
-->Pricing strategy aligns with Dutch EV demand and taxation shifts
At €36,990, the Model 3 Standard fits neatly into Tesla’s ongoing lineup reshuffle. The current Model 3 RWD has crept toward €42,000, creating space for a more competitive entry-level option, and positioning the new Model 3 Standard comfortably below the €39,990 Model Y Standard.
The timing aligns with rising Dutch demand for affordable EVs as subsidies like SEPP fade and tax advantages for electric cars continue to wind down, EVUpdate noted. Buyers seeking a no-frills EV with solid range are then likely to see the new trim as a compelling alternative.
With the U.S. variant long established and the Model Y Standard already available in the Netherlands, the appearance of an entry-level Model 3 in the Dutch configurator seems like a logical next step.
News
Tesla Model Y is still China’s best-selling premium EV through October
The premium-priced SUV outpaced rivals despite a competitive field, while the Model 3 also secured an impressive position.
The Tesla Model Y led China’s top-selling pure electric vehicles in the 200,000–300,000 RMB segment through October 2025, as per Yiche data compiled from China Passenger Car Association (CPCA) figures.
The premium-priced SUV outpaced rivals despite a competitive field, while the Model 3 also secured an impressive position.
The Model Y is still unrivaled
The Model Y’s dominance shines in Yiche’s October report, topping the chart for vehicles priced between 200,000 and 300,000 RMB. With 312,331 units retailed from January through October, the all-electric crossover was China’s best-selling EV in the 200,000–300,000 RMB segment.
The Xiaomi SU7 is a strong challenger at No. 2 with 234,521 units, followed by the Tesla Model 3, which achieved 146,379 retail sales through October. The Model Y’s potentially biggest rival, the Xiaomi YU7, is currently at No. 4 with 80,855 retail units sold.
Efficiency kings
The Model 3 and Model Y recently claimed the top two spots in Autohome’s latest real-world energy-consumption test, outperforming a broad field of Chinese-market EVs under identical 120 km/h cruising conditions with 375 kg payload and fixed 24 °C cabin temperature. The Model 3 achieved 20.8 kWh/100 km while the Model Y recorded 21.8 kWh/100 km, reaffirming Tesla’s efficiency lead.
The results drew immediate attention from Xiaomi CEO Lei Jun, who publicly recognized Tesla’s advantage while pledging continued refinement for his brand’s lineup.
-->“The Xiaomi SU7’s energy consumption performance is also very good; you can take a closer look. The fact that its test results are weaker than Tesla’s is partly due to objective reasons: the Xiaomi SU7 is a C-segment car, larger and with higher specifications, making it heavier and naturally increasing energy consumption. Of course, we will continue to learn from Tesla and further optimize its energy consumption performance!” Lei Jun wrote in a post on Weibo.
Tesla tinkering with Speed Profiles on FSD v14.2.1 has gone too far
Tesla’s most affordable car is coming to the Netherlands
