News
SpaceX’s Mr. Steven crosses Panama Canal on 5000 mile journey to Florida
Iconic SpaceX vessel Mr. Steven has completed a successful transit of the Panama Canal as of February 7th, leaving the fairing recovery ship approximately 3-4 days from arrival at its new home in Port Canaveral, Florida.
Mr. Steven’s move from the West Coast to the East Coast comes shortly after a series of controlled fairing recovery tests – dropped by helicopter before deploying a parafoil – brought the vessel closer than ever before to successfully snagging a Falcon fairing out of the air. Thanks to webcams at the landmark, Mr. Steven’s trip through the Panama Canal also revealed that his arms were uninstalled for the coast swap, while two fairing halves – covered in tarps – stood out on the ship’s large deck.
Aaaaand the grand finale, a gif of Mr. Steven’s transit through the Panama Canal’s first western lock (Miraflores). Probably the last we’ll see of him until Port Canaveral, with an ETA around ~4 days from now 🙂#SpaceX pic.twitter.com/DIus6K5hK5
— Eric Ralph (@13ericralph31) February 7, 2019
Although the presence of two fairing halves could be a sign of something else, it could indicate that SpaceX has plans to continue its controlled fairing drop/recovery tests, albeit this time in the Atlantic Ocean. Thanks to a sharp-eyed local observer, it can be observed that, while topped with tarps and safely secured, the fairing halves aboard Mr. Steven had no additional protection against sea spray and the elements over the course of a 5000+ mile (~8000 km) journey at a cruising speed of roughly 20 mph (~32 km/h). In other words, they are most certainly not going to be reused.
If not for reuse, then the only reason Mr. Steven would need to bring fairings to Florida is if there is some need for fairing recovery development hardware (halves that can be abused without opportunity cost), either for more basic mechanical and interface tests with fairings and nets or to continue SpaceX’s program of experimental drop testing.
Is your #MrSteven here in Panama @elonmusk and @SpaceX ? pic.twitter.com/GvTNGYQU9K
— Hugo Tello (@soyhugotello) February 6, 2019
Intriguingly, although SpaceX released a second video of “one” of Mr. Steven’s final West Coast catch tests, some basic sleuthing can easily determine that the test shown in the January 29th video probably occurred more than two weeks earlier, on January 10th. This means that one final helicopter drop test was performed (January 26th) before SpaceX departed Port of LA for Florida on the 29th. Some might conclude, then, that SpaceX’s latest drop tweet was more than a little coy, perhaps indicating that the results of the Jan 26 test may have been appreciably different than the extreme near-miss experienced on the 10th.
While the company’s history – combined with CEO Elon Musk’s welcome tendency of sharing good news almost as soon as he hears it – suggests that the Jan 26 test was probably not a success, SpaceX could be playing its development cards close to its chest when it comes to fairing recovery.
One of Mr. Steven’s final West Coast fairing recovery tests before shipping out for the East Coast. Wait for it… pic.twitter.com/A7q37Gpllu
— SpaceX (@SpaceX) January 30, 2019
Regardless, SpaceX clearly has no plans to end its experimental fairing recovery program with success so agonizingly within reach. Mr. Steven’s move to Florida sets the vessel up for a dramatic increase in available post-launch fairing recovery attempts at the same time as Falcon fairings likely still cost around $3 million apiece and continue to pose the same conundrum Musk raised in mid-2017.
“Imagine if we had a $6 million pallet of cash falling through the sky. Would we try to catch it? I think the answer is yes.” – Elon Musk, July 2017
Although the cost of SpaceX’s fairing recovery program is probably several tens of millions of dollars at this point, it seems probable that Musk would still stand behind his thought experiment. Assuming SpaceX can cost-effectively reuse fairings once recovery is assured, a development program costing upwards of $50-100M could be entirely recouped after just 10-20 dual fairing recoveries, compared to the 21 fairings SpaceX flew in 2018 alone. As long as Falcon 9 and Heavy are likely to continue operating for several more years (all but guaranteed), fairing recovery should still prove worthwhile if SpaceX can close the recovery gap within the next 6-12 months.
Check out Teslarati’s newsletters for prompt updates, on-the-ground perspectives, and unique glimpses of SpaceX’s rocket launch and recovery processes!
News
Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile are trying to shut Starlink out before FCC vote
AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile want 290 MHz cut from an FCC satellite plan before Thursday.
AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile are asking the Federal Communications Commission to pull nearly 300 MHz of spectrum out of a proposal that would let satellite companies like SpaceX offer cell service directly to ordinary phones. The request lands one day before the agency votes on it.
The FCC will vote Thursday, October 29, on a notice of proposed rulemaking that would make an additional 482 MHz available for direct to device service, expanding the number of eligible bands from five to 13, according to the FCC fact sheet. It would also scrap the rule requiring a satellite operator to lease spectrum from carriers, replacing it with a certification that the operator has coexistence agreements in place or holds the terrestrial license itself.
That second path matters for SpaceX. As Teslarati reported earlier this month, SpaceX agreed to buy Grain Management’s nationwide 800 MHz portfolio to turn Starlink Mobile into a full US carrier, adding to the spectrum it already bought from EchoStar.
The carriers want two bands removed, 2.5 GHz and 3.45 GHz, which make up 290 MHz of the 482 MHz on the table. Through industry group CTIA, they argued that about 300 million users depend on those bands and that satellite operations in them are not technically feasible. T-Mobile, which calls 2.5 GHz the foundation of its Ultra Capacity 5G network, said in its own filing that satellite interference could wipe out up to 96% of a cell site’s uplink coverage area and cut uplink speeds by 88% to 99%.
Executives from all three carriers met with FCC staff on October 20, and T-Mobile CEO Srini Gopalan met separately with FCC Chairman Brendan Carr. T-Mobile’s role stands out because it is still SpaceX’s US launch partner for Starlink Mobile. The three carriers have also teamed up on their own satellite joint venture to pool spectrum, a move widely seen as a response to Starlink.
SpaceX is asking for the opposite. In an October 23 filing after meetings with FCC staff and commissioners’ offices, the company asked regulators to add the 902 to 928 MHz band to the proposal. “Doing so now saves time later,” SpaceX wrote. The company also asked the FCC to modernize interference rules and align satellite deployment requirements with those for terrestrial cell networks, saying the goal is to let satellite and ground networks work together so Americans stay connected wherever they are.
The carriers have not been shy about how they view SpaceX as a competitor. On Verizon’s third quarter earnings call Monday, its chief executive said Starlink Mobile “just can’t compete with a terrestrial network” and estimated SpaceX would need four to six years and $300 billion to $500 billion to build a full US carrier network.
Thursday’s vote will not settle which bands survive. Adopting the notice opens a public comment period, with final rules to come later in the proceeding. The FCC already considered and rejected 2.5 GHz for satellite coverage once, in 2024. SpaceX also is not the only satellite player watching: the FCC approved Amazon’s $11.6 billion acquisition of Globalstar on October 27, giving its planned direct to device fleet its own mobile satellite spectrum.
A Tesla Semi caught fire in Hayward, California, which caused both directions of traffic to shut down for hours before being completely reopened early on Wednesday, the California Highway Patrol said.
The fire occurred just after 5:30 local time in Hayward on Tuesday, as the Semi caught fire in the southbound lanes of I-880 before CHP officials made the decision to shut down both lanes of traffic due to potential risks from hazardous chemical smoke.
There were no injuries reported.
🚨 A Tesla Semi reportedly caught fire, with California Highway Patrol confirming. The Semi was on I-880 SB
An estimated 5,000 to 7,000 semi-truck and large commercial vehicle fires occur on U.S. roadways every year
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 28, 2026
The cause of the fire is currently unknown, as neither Tesla nor the CHP have not determined a cause.
However, some images taken before the Semi was completely destroyed by the fire seem to indicate this might have been an older unit, as it appears to be one of the designs that Tesla shipped as part of its pilot program, before revising it and starting mass production just a month ago.
@Tslachan From on of the videos looks like it’s an old Semi (not the refresh version that recently started production) https://t.co/KzwmR2kXow
— Area Under The Curve 🎗️ (@AreaUnderCurve) October 28, 2026
At the time of publication, CHP had not returned our request for a comment for additional details, including the Semi involved and any potential collaboration on an investigation between the CHP and Tesla. We will update this story when we hear back from them.
The southbound lanes were reopened at 3:30 a.m. on Wednesday, with the northbound lanes opening last night a few hours after the fire began. The CHP did state that the lithium batteries were “incredibly difficult to extinguish,” according to NBC Bay Area.
The truck’s driver said that the Semi caught fire, but he did not have an explanation.
An estimated 5,000 to 7,000 semi-truck and large commercial vehicle fires occur on U.S. roadways every year.
Tesla’s launch of the “Emergency Drive Away” function a few months back offered owners a safe option to evacuate an area if they were in reasonable danger. The function finally got its first use in the real world, but it appears it was by mistake.
A video shared by u/Joshalander in the r/TeslaLounge subreddit recorded the instance from his vehicle and said the incident took place in Austin this past weekend during the city’s F1 Race.
“Was charging around 6 AM this past Sunday in Austin before heading to the F1 race and heard a pop. Looked over and saw the new emergency drive-away feature in action. Genuinely felt bad for the dude when he got out and realized what happened, since he looked exhausted and only seemed to half-read the prompts.”
🚨 Here’s the first look at Tesla’s Emergency Drive Away function in action:
Apparently this driver accidentally enabled it and drove forward; you can see the Supercharger pull with the car.
Tesla said previously this would cost up to $25k if not used properly. https://t.co/B4qQRrsO6B
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 28, 2026
Emergency Drive Away unlatches the Supercharger connector from the vehicle, but still causes damage to both the car and the Supercharger. Tesla has said that it will cost up to $25,000 in repairs to have everything fixed back to normal.
Additionally, the company said that if it were not used in an emergency situation, the driver of the vehicle who activated the Emergency Drive Away feature would be responsible for all repair costs.
Tesla constitutes the following situations as reasonable justifications for activating the feature:
- You face an immediate threat to your life or personal safety.
- You must leave the area immediately.
- Exiting the vehicle is unsafe.
- Unplugging the charge connector would unreasonably delay your departure or expose you to a risk to your personal safety.
After using the feature, Tesla requires the driver to schedule Service so the car can be inspected.
Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile are trying to shut Starlink out before FCC vote
Tesla Semi catches fire in California: what we know
