News
SpaceX rocket booster makes it back to port after hard drone ship landing
SpaceX has completed its third rocket launch of 2020 and the most recent booster to launch safely returned to Port Canaveral on Saturday after an exceptionally hard drone ship landing.
Falcon 9 booster (first stage) B1051 lifted off for the third time on January 29th, following up two prior orbital-class missions by placing SpaceX’s fourth batch of 60 Starlink satellites into low Earth orbit (LEO). B1051 debuted on March 2nd, 2019 when it became the first Falcon 9 rocket to launch SpaceX’s next-generation Crew Dragon spacecraft, successfully sending the vehicle on its way to what would end up being a flawless rendezvous with the International Space Station (ISS). Less than four months later, B1051 completed its second mission, this time lifting off from SpaceX’s Vandenberg Air Force Base (VAFB), California facilities before landing in zero-visibility fog conditions just a thousand feet from the pad.
Compared to some of the higher-energy geostationary (high orbit) launches SpaceX often performs, B1051’s two prior launches allowed for relatively gentle reentries and landings. On January 29th, 2020, after sending SpaceX’s 3rd batch of upgraded Starlink v1.0 satellites (Starlink V1 L3) on their way to space, the Falcon 9 booster experienced the hardest successful landing seen after a SpaceX launch in quite some time.
With Starlink V1 L3 complete, SpaceX has officially launched an incredible 120 satellites weighing some 32 metric tons (70,500 lb) in a single month – 22 days, to be precise. If everything goes as planned, those two monthly Starlink launches should become SpaceX’s average over the rest of 2020, necessary to satisfy the company’s goal of completing 20-24 Starlink launches this year alone. If SpaceX replicates its January successes this month, the company’s Starlink constellation – already ~230 satellites strong – may even be ready to start serving internet to customers in the northern US and Canada as early as March 2020, less than two months from now.



Meanwhile, the mission marked SpaceX’s second Falcon 9 landing and recovery of the new year, as well as the sixth time an orbital-class SpaceX booster has completed three launches. SpaceX continues to push the envelope of reusable rocketry ever since it debuted Falcon 9’s Block 5 upgrade in May 2018.
Designed to enable no less than 10 launches per booster with minimal refurbishment in between, SpaceX’s Block 5 reusability milestones have gotten much closer together ever since the company began dedicated Starlink launches, reusing a payload fairing for the first time and launching two Falcon 9 boosters for the fourth time in just the last two and a half months. In fact, SpaceX already has plans to launch Falcon 9 booster B1048 for the fifth time – another major reusability first – as early as the next 4-5 weeks.
Hard landing; tough rocket
Starlink V1 L3’s launch followed a trajectory almost exactly identical to the two V1 missions that preceded it in November 2019 and January 2020 and Falcon 9 B1051 ignited its central Merlin 1D engine for the last time around eight minutes after liftoff. Twenty seconds or so later, the Falcon 9 booster rapidly shut down its landing engine, visibly falling several feet onto the deck of drone ship Of Course I Still Love You (OCISLY).


The results of that unintentionally hard landing are extremely apparent in photos taken of the same booster after its first (March 2019) and third (Jan 2020) landings on drone ship OCISLY, compared above. Taken from almost identical perspectives as the drone ship passed through the mouth of Port Canaveral, the difference in the booster’s height and stance are hard to miss, with B1051’s engine bells and the black ‘belt’ of its heat-shielded engine section clearly sitting several feet lower after Starlink V1 L3.
While subtle, the most important difference is near the tips of each visible landing leg’s telescoping boom, visible in the form of a final, smaller cylinder on the left (earlier) image. On the right, that cylinder has effectively disappeared. This is actually an intentional feature of Falcon 9’s landing leg design: known as a ‘crush core’, the tip of each leg boom holds a roughly 1m (3ft) long cylinder of aluminum honeycomb, optimized to lose structural integrity (crush) only after a specific amount of force is applied. In essence, those crush cores serve as dead-simple, single-use shock absorbers that can be reused as long as a given booster’s landing is gentle enough.
B1051’s third landing was definitely not gentle enough, but it appears that the booster’s rough fall onto the drone ship’s deck was just within the safety margins those crush cores provide. Why B1051 fell onto the deck is unclear, potentially caused by the drone being at the bottom of a swell or a last-second anomaly with the booster’s landing engine. Thankfully, regardless of the cause of the anomaly, B1051’s crush cores can be quite easily replaced, meaning that the booster can remain operational as long as its hard landing didn’t cause any less-visible damage or stress elsewhere on the rocket.
In short, SpaceX smart design decisions very likely allowed a part worth just a few thousand dollars to save a Falcon 9 booster worth tens of millions of dollars from the scrap heap. With a little luck, B1051 should have at least several more launches in its future before entering retirement.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
News
Tesla and driver sued by family of woman killed in Texas crash: what we know
Tesla is being sued by the family of the woman who was killed in a Texas crash involving a Model 3. The driver, who is also being sued, claimed the vehicle was operating on Autopilot mode, but Tesla executives have come out challenging that claim, stating that the driver of the vehicle overrode the system.
The lawsuit was filed by 76-year-old Martha Avila’s daughter and her husband, who allege a “design defect” involving a Tesla and a failure to warn. The suit alleges negligence against Tesla and the driver, Michael Butler.
Butler “stated he was operating with an automated driving assistance system engaged at the time of the crash,” the Harris County Sheriff’s Office said in a statement. He showed no signs of intoxication and was cooperative, the Sheriff’s Office said, according to NBC News.
Just after reports of the crash and numerous headlines that immediately blamed Tesla’s Autopilot suite, both Tesla CEO Elon Musk and Head of AI Ashok Elluswamy challenged that. Musk said the crash made “no sense” given that Tesla Autopilot and Full Self-Driving do not travel at the speeds the door cameras captured the car traveling at, which Tesla says was 73 MPH.
Tesla finally clarifies fatal Texas crash, confirms driver manually overrode acceleration
Elluswamy also revealed that Tesla data showed Butler overrode the system by pressing the accelerator to 100%, and that the pedal was compressed fully even after the car had crashed. Tesla has not released this data to the public, likely because it is communicating with agencies like the NHTSA on an investigation.
The suit uses a Washington Post analysis of government data that “identified at least 17 fatal incidents linked to Tesla Autopilot.”
This is far from the first time an accident has been blamed on Autopilot. A fatal crash in Texas was blamed on Autopilot several years ago, but when Tesla released data to the NTSB, which was investigating the crash, Autopilot was not available where the crash occurred, and Autosteer was never enabled, meaning the car was manually controlled at the time of the accident.
“Application of the accelerator pedal was found to be as high as 98.8 percent,” the NTSB said in their findings. The highest recorded speed in the five seconds leading up to the impact was 67 miles per hour. The area where the crash occurred is residential, and Texas State laws… pic.twitter.com/XGD97NHVZ2
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) March 18, 2026
More information on the accident will be released as Tesla works with agencies to find the cause of the crash. From personal experience, it is hard to imagine Tesla Autopilot or FSD operating in this manner. It drives sometimes too cautiously in residential areas in parking lots, at least in my experience. Speeding happens, but at this rate in this type of area, it is hard to believe.
We look forward to more details being released with time.
Cybertruck
Tesla Cybertruck is officially the safest pickup, IIHS says
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.
