News
SpaceX's workhorse Falcon 9 rocket expected to reach major launch milestone in 2020
Hours after SpaceX launched its 240th new Starlink satellite into orbit, Elon Musk took to Twitter to cryptically reveal that the company’s workhorse Falcon 9 rocket could “reach triple digits this year” if everything goes according to plan.
Designed and built by SpaceX in the late 2000s, the Falcon 9 rocket launched for the first time in June 2010. Developed for the unfathomably low price of $300 million from clean-sheet design to first orbital launch, the original single-core Falcon 9 rocket – known as V1.0 – was about 48m (160 ft) tall, weighed 333 metric tons (735,000 lb) fully fueled, and was capable of launching almost 10.5 metric tons (23,000 lb) into low Earth orbit (LEO). Famously, when provided with Falcon 9’s basic specifications and characteristics, an independent NASA study estimated that the rocket’s development would have cost the agency anywhere from $1.7 billion to $4 billion to design and build.
NASA came to this conclusion in 2011, less than a year after Falcon 9’s first launch, and that the disconnect between the status quo held by NASA and the broader US spaceflight industry and what SpaceX tangibly achieved came to almost perfectly symbolize the rocket’s first six or so years of operations. Although SpaceX stumbled hard with two catastrophic rocket failures in June 2015 and September 2016, the company ultimately picked itself up, learned from those still-agonizing lessons, and has since shaped Falcon 9 into one of the most capable, reliable, reusable, and prolific launch vehicles ever flown. That latter characteristic – the sheer volume of launches Falcon 9 has come to represent – is what CEO Elon Musk was referring to earlier this week.
Specifically, after Wednesday’s flawless launch, Falcon 9 has now launched 80 times in its 9.5-year career, while Starlink V1 L3 marked the workhorse rocket’s 52nd consecutive success of 79 total. Impressively, while those 52 launches represent almost 65% of all of Falcon 9’s missions, SpaceX has dramatically improved the rocket’s reliability and availability over the last few years. In short, Falcon 9 has completed 52 consecutively successful launches in exactly 36 months (January 2017 to January 2020), meaning that nearly two-thirds of its lifetime launches have occurred in less than a third of the time Falcon 9 has been operational.
Put a different way, since the start of 2017, SpaceX has – on average – launched Falcon 9 more than four times (1.4 launches/month) as often as the rocket managed in its first 6.5 years of operations (1 launch every 2.7 months). Tweeting on January 29th, 2020 in response to an overview of the number of launches performed by each operational US rocket, CEO Elon Musk hinted that he believes “Falcon 9 will achieve triple digits” in 2020.
In other words, Musk thinks that SpaceX’s workhorse Falcon 9 rocket will be able to reach more than 100 lifetime launches by the end of 2020 — a feat that will require at least 20 additional Falcon 9 launches over the next 11 months. Speaking hours after SpaceX completed its third launch in January 2020 alone, it’s not hard to imagine – assuming, as Musk did, that “all goes well – that Falcon 9 will manage another 20 launches this year.
Averaged out, SpaceX has performed a launch every 9.7 days in January. Extrapolated to the rest of the year and assuming no improvement, SpaceX could theoretically perform as many as 37 launches in 2020. It’s worth noting, however, that SpaceX’s third launch of the month was ready for flight as early as January 21st but was delayed more than a week by bad weather – obviously out of the company’s control. Had weather permitted, SpaceX even had a fourth launch planned this month – a Starlink mission that is now expected sometime in early February.
In simple terms, it would take one or several major upsets to prevent Falcon 9 from reaching >100 lifetime launches later this year. Even if every single customer launch abruptly slips into 2021, SpaceX has still said that it has plans for 20-24 dedicated Starlink launches in 2020 alone, potentially singlehandedly carrying Falcon 9 over the 100-launch crest.
Falcon 9’s next launch – the fourth Starlink v1.0 mission – is currently scheduled no earlier than (NET) early February, followed by another Starlink mission later that month and Cargo Dragon’s final space station resupply mission NET March 2nd.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
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
