News
SpaceX retracts latest rocket’s landing legs in impressive feat of durability
A SpaceX Falcon 9 booster had all four of its landing legs successfully retracted after a flawless fourth launch and landing, highlighting the impressive margins and durability of the rocket’s upgraded Block 5 design.
On April 22nd, Falcon 9 booster B1051 lifted off on its fourth orbital-class mission – also its second 60-satellite Starlink launch this. Around eight minutes later, B1051 successfully landed aboard drone ship Of Course I Still Love You (OCISLY), ending a back-to-back streak of failed ocean recoveries for SpaceX and verifying that the cause of a March 2020 in-flight engine failure had been rectified. After the loss of booster B1056 and B1048 in February and March, it was also simply a relief to have B1051 safe and sound aboard OCISLY, ensuring that the rocket should be able to support another launch in the near future.
After sailing in port on April 26th, SpaceX technicians lifted a booster off of drone ship OCISLY’s deck for the first time since late January – coincidentally (or maybe not) also Falcon 9 B1051. Two days after its arrival in port and transfer onto dry land, SpaceX successfully retracted all of the massive booster’s landing legs in less than three hours and had it ready for transport less than two hours after that. While B1051’s brisk fourth recovery didn’t break any records, it still serves as a reminder of Falcon 9’s impressive durability in light of the landing it experienced just ~85 days prior.
B1051’s successful leg retraction after its fourth launch and landing is particularly impressive for one main reason: after its third launch, the booster suffered perhaps the hardest drone ship landing any Block 5 rocket has thus far experienced.
Taken in March 2019 and February 2020 after Falcon 9 B1051’s first and third launches and landings, the photo below reveals just how hard a landing B1051 experienced after its Starlink-4 launch. Built almost entirely out of carbon fiber composites and mounted directly to the rocket’s tank walls, Falcon’s telescoping landing legs rely on something known as a ‘crush core’ – made out of aluminum honeycomb – that’s designed to intentionally collapse under a very specific amount of stress.
The crush core is situated in the very tip of the cylindrical leg booms and is easily visible above on the left, while it has nearly disappeared in the right (after) photo after an exceptionally hard landing used up what looks like 90+% of the booster’s safety margin. In other words, if B1051 had landed just a little harder after its third launch, it’s possible that the booster’s landing leg booms would have used up all their crush cores and been driven into the kerosene tank they attach to, potentially totaling the Falcon 9 first stage.
Instead, while clearly a rough landing, B1051 appears to have had its landing leg crush cores replaced and was made ready for another Starlink launch less than three months after that exceptionally hard landing. In other words, despite the rarity of similar hard landings over dozens of recent booster landings, SpaceX was apparently almost entirely unconcerned about the rocket’s state.
As usual, the company almost certainly checked the structural integrity of B1051’s major welds and landing leg hardware before certifying the vehicle for its fourth launch, but the fact that its reuse was so seemingly unexceptional is a testament to the sheer durability of SpaceX’s reusable rocket boosters. Thanks to the modularity of its design, B1051 should have no trouble performing at least several more orbital-class launches over the next several months (if not years). More likely than not, the Falcon 9 Block 5 rocket will fly again just two or so months from now on another Starlink mission, of which SpaceX has 20+ nominally scheduled this year alone.
Tesla just gave what is perhaps its biggest signal yet that the launch of the Cybercab, its autonomous ride-hailing-geared car, is imminent.
The Cybercab has been spotted outside of Gigafactory Texas in massive numbers over the past few days, with hundreds of units being stored on property just days after the vehicle received a Certificate of Conformity from the EPA.
Today, things were a bit different.
Cybercabs spotted on Giga Texas property today had an addition: a Cybercab decal on the side, reminiscent of the “Robotaxi” ones that were placed on Model Ys just as the company launched its ride-sharing platform about a year ago.
Giga Texas drone operator Joe Tegtmeyer noticed the change today:
Tesla Cybercabs are now getting “Cybercab” logos on the side of them!
Tesla did the same with Model Ys that were given “Robotaxi” logos: https://t.co/DanANtw1m7 pic.twitter.com/FqOhH0S9Ks
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 19, 2026
Tesla could be signaling that the Cybercab is preparing to enter the Robotaxi fleet in the coming weeks or months with this move. It seems more symbolic than anything; Tesla is ready to throw Cybercabs in the ride-hailing platform just as it did with Model Ys last year.
The addition of the Certificate of Conformity awarded to the Cybercab is another major factor working to Tesla’s advantage. The company now has permission from the EPA to allow the vehicle to operate on public roads and enter the chain of commerce. It’s officially street legal.
Tesla Cybercab specs revealed: range, curb weight, range ratings, and more
The big question that remains is whether Tesla will be able to operate the car without a safety monitor, especially considering it plans to put the car out there without a steering wheel or pedals. With the Cybercab only having a seating capacity of two, it is hard to believe Tesla will even consider putting a Safety Monitor in the car.
It did recently self-certify as Level 4 and has the ability to operate driverless vehicles in the State of Texas under a law that took effect on May 28. You can read more about that here:
Tesla’s Robotaxi dreams just took a massive step toward reality
We’d imagine Cybercabs will be on the roads as soon as July, but August will likely be a better estimate of when the car will be entered into the Cybercab fleet. It all depends at where Tesla is, as they’ve truly prioritized safety with the rollout of the Robotaxi platform.
Elon Musk has publicly questioned Moody’s credit assessments following the rating agency’s decision to assign SpaceX a Baa1 investment-grade rating, two notches above Tesla’s Baa3. The comments came amid discussions comparing the two companies’ financial profiles.
SpaceX earned its first-time Baa1 rating with a stable outlook from Moody’s. The agency highlighted the company’s leadership in orbital launches, the growing recurring revenue from its Starlink satellite network, strong vertical integration, U.S. government contracts, and emerging opportunities in AI infrastructure.
These factors were cited as supporting robust cash flows, margin expansion, and financial flexibility.
Musk responded directly: “Tesla’s credit rating is ridiculously low tbh,” and added, “Yeah, makes no sense. Tesla has over $40B in cash, no debt, and is consistently profitable!” His remarks underscored Tesla’s balance sheet strength and profitability at a time when many traditional automakers continue to report losses in the shift to electric vehicles.
Yeah, makes no sense.
Tesla has over $40B in cash, no debt and is consistently profitable!
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 19, 2026
Tesla maintains a leading position in the global EV market, with diversification into energy and storage, battery technology, and robotics through projects like Optimus. Recent financial updates show the company generated positive free cash flow of $1.4 billion in Q1 2026, supported by operating cash flow of $3.9 billion. Cash and short-term investments stood at approximately $44.7 billion.
Moody’s has affirmed Tesla’s Baa3 issuer rating with a stable outlook in periodic reviews, acknowledging the company’s EV leadership, technology strengths, including AI for autonomous vehicles, solid profitability, and strong liquidity.
Tesla (TSLA) scores Baa3 Moody’s rating for ‘stable’ outlook
However, the agency has also noted challenges in the automotive segment and expectations for margin pressures.
Musk’s critique highlights a common debate about how traditional rating methodologies apply to high-growth, capital-intensive technology companies. SpaceX benefits from long-term government-backed contracts and diversified, recurring revenue streams, while Tesla’s valuation reflects heavy investment in future technologies such as autonomy and robotics.
Both ratings remain investment-grade, yet the one-notch difference has fueled online discussion about potential inconsistencies in evaluating innovative firms.
The exchange comes as SpaceX explores financing options following its recent valuation milestones, while Tesla continues executing on its multi-year roadmap. Musk’s pointed response serves as a reminder that credit ratings, though influential for borrowing costs, represent one lens through which markets assess corporate strength—and that company leaders often view their financial positions through the lens of long-term innovation and cash generation rather than short-term risk metrics alone.
A new report from Reuters claims that a transport authority in Sweden is pushing back against the approval of Tesla’s Full Self-Driving suite because it will travel over speed limits.
The report says the Swedish Transport Administration (TRV) recommends the European Union votes against FSD’s approval. TRV believes it should not be approved until Tesla disables FSD’s ability to speed.
TRV sent a letter to the European Union’s Technical Committee on Motor Vehicles (TCMV), which is set to meet on June 30 to discuss the potential approval of the Tesla FSD suite in the country. Tesla, which has received various approvals in Europe over the past two months, has not provided a comment.
Teslas operating on FSD do travel over the speed limit, depending on the Speed Profile that is chosen. Drivers have the ability to disengage FSD at any point; Tesla specifically states that those supervising the suite are responsible for its actions.
Let’s cut to the chase: humans operating any vehicle speed almost daily in the United States. Realistically, speed limits in the U.S. are more frequently treated as speed minimums. However, other countries are different, and driving behaviors are less aggressive.
TRV believes that “allowing automated systems to systematically exceed legal speed limits…risks undermining both the legal framework and the expected safety benefits of vehicle automation,” the report stated. It’s surprising that Tesla has not received this claim from other countries previously.
This could be a good argument to bring Max Speed back, the setting that previously allowed the driver to choose the absolute fastest the car would travel.
This would still put the responsibility of supervision in the hands of the driver. It would allow the driver to choose whether the car would travel over the speed limit or not, acknowledging that they set the speed, and if they get pulled over, there would be no ability to argue it.
However, it does not seem as if this is something Tesla will do, especially considering many U.S. drivers have requested the feature in an effort to eliminate speeding or at least tone it down. The company has not shown any interest in bringing it back.
Tesla has approvals for FSD in Europe in Estonia, Lithuania, Denmark, the Netherlands, and Belgium.
Tesla Cybercab launch is imminent after latest sighting at Giga Texas
Elon Musk says this part of Tesla ‘makes no sense’
