News
SpaceX ready for one more mission before Falcon Heavy’s maiden launch
Set to be the nightcap of relatively slow January for SpaceX, the rocket company is nearing the end of preparations for the launch of a communications satellite co-owned by SES and the government of Luxembourg, known as GovSat-1/SES-16. Scheduled to lift off no earlier than 4:25PM EST (2125 GMT) on Tuesday, January 30, the launch will continue SES’ tradition of flying aboard reused SpaceX rockets, with the ~4000 kg communication satellite expected to be carried into orbit by Falcon 9 B1032 (Booster #32), a booster that first flew during the May 2017 launch of the National Reconnaissance Office’s (NRO) classified NROL-76 spacecraft.

A panorama of LC-40 ahead of its return to flight, the CRS-13 Cargo Dragon mission. The same pad will host GovSat-1 in just over 24 hours. (Tom Cross/Teslarati)
Following an incredible six flight-proven Falcon 9 launches in 2017, the very first year SpaceX began flying reused rockets, GovSat-1 will mark the first of many, many additional flight-proven launches to come in 2018. Even before the inaugural flights of the purpose-built, highly reusable Block 5 of Falcon 9, currently slated for sometime in the next several months, SpaceX is expected to conduct a flurry of flight-proven launches as it wears down its stock of soon-to-be-outdated rockets of the Block 3 and 4 varieties. Educated estimates place the number of reused launches at around five between February and April 2018, six if Falcon Heavy is included (both side boosters are flight-proven). A minimum of six more reused Falcon 9s are then expected to fly between May and the end of 2018, and this almost certainly does not account for the imminent introduction of Block 5.
It is reasonable to assume that the first successful flights of Falcon 9 Block 5 and first several manufactured cores will be followed only months later by a phase change towards reusability. This shift will likely see SpaceX move to a mode of operations that strongly encourages and subsidizes reused boosters as the default option for customers, with flights aboard new cores a comparatively rare alternative reserved only for unique holdouts like NASA, the USAF, and NRO.
2 Falcons on 2 Pads launching by @SpaceX in next 2 weeks 1st time-#FalconHeavy at #pad39A (l) & #Falcon9 #SES16 #GovSat1 at pad #SLC40 (r) post Jan 26 static fire test at @CapeCanaveralFL AFS. Credit: @ken_kremer https://t.co/5g37NsRw85 #SpaceUpClose pic.twitter.com/Lnoh3sCWUB
— Ken Kremer🇺🇦🇩🇪🇺🇸🚀🧪 (@ken_kremer) January 27, 2018
Somewhat sadly, the inherent engineering limits of older versions of Falcon 9 and the imminent introduction of Block 5 mean that SpaceX has less and less of a need to recover flight proven boosters that have no hope of being cost-effectively refurbished and conducting additional flights. This attitude was highlighted with the fourth launch of ten Iridium NEXT satellites in late December 2017, which saw a flight-proven Falcon 9 conduct a controlled ocean ditch after separating from the second stage. While crew aboard at least one of SpaceX’s fleet of recovery vessels were tasked with attempting to recover any accessible floating debris after the first stage ditched into the ocean, it was very much intentionally expended, and SpaceX’s West coast drone ship never left port. GovSat-1 will see this intentional practice of expending recoverable boosters continue – Falcon 9 B1032 is also expected to ditch into the ocean, with no recovery attempt being made aboard the drone ship Of Course I Still Love You.
Nevertheless, SpaceX-leased recovery vessels GO Quest and GO Searcher were both seen leaving Port Canaveral, Florida yesterday, presumably in order to attempt the recovery of either floating debris from the first stage and/or the rocket’s payload fairing, a milestone that SpaceX is still striving to reach.
L-1 day #Falcon9 launch weather forecast. Forecast is unchanged from yesterday. A 40% chance of acceptable conditions in the 2hr launch window tomorrow with the primary concern being winds. #SpaceX #SES #SES16 #GovSat1 pic.twitter.com/PoUx9V0qK7
— Chris G (@ChrisG_SpX) January 29, 2018
Follow along live as launch photographer Tom Cross and I cover these exciting proceedings as close to live as possible. Tom will be heading to Cape Canaveral Air Force Station early tomorrow morning in order to set up his remote cameras to capture yet another beautiful SpaceX launch.
Teslarati – Instagram – Twitter
Tom Cross – Instagram
Eric Ralph – Twitter
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
Investor's Corner
Lucid CEO dispels any rumors of bankruptcy: ‘So far from the facts’
Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.
The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.
The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”
Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Napoli said:
“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.
As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.
We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.
My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.
I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”
🚨 Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli calls rumors of financial issues “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Read his full remarks here: https://t.co/t3Pg1NHvzy pic.twitter.com/LvHUPhO4Qf
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 15, 2026
It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.
Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.
Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.
News
Tesla responds to strange Supercharging pricing error with classy move
Tesla has once again demonstrated strong customer focus by swiftly addressing and fully refunding a bizarre Supercharger pricing glitch that affected drivers in Atlantic Canada.
The issue surfaced earlier this month when the Tesla app began displaying dramatically inflated per-minute charging rates at stations in Prince Edward Island and parts of New Brunswick.
One widely shared screenshot from a Charlottetown, PEI Supercharger showed rates reaching ridiculous levels: $6.00 per minute for the 180-250 kW tier, along with $3.57/min for 100-180 kW and $2.29/min for 60-100 kW.
Correct pricing will be going live at midnight tonight. All fees since July 2nd 2026 will be waived.
— Tesla Charging (@TeslaCharging) July 13, 2026
These figures were several times higher than normal Supercharger pricing in the region.
To put the error in perspective, charging at the highest incorrect rate would have been shockingly expensive.
At 250 kW, a common charging speed at Superchargers, a vehicle pulls roughly 4.17 kWh per minute. Under the glitch, a driver spending just 10 minutes at peak power would face a $60 bill. A typical 20- to 30-minute session to add meaningful range could have cost $120 to $180 or more, before any congestion fees.
Tesla gets another layer of gamification with Free Supercharging on the line
By comparison, standard Canadian Supercharger rates usually fall between $0.25 and $0.60 per kWh, making a similar session cost roughly $15–$40. The erroneous per-minute structure, combined with the inflated numbers, turned what should be a convenient stop into a potential financial shock.
The glitch appears to have started sometime around early July, and quickly drew attention on social media as owners questioned whether Tesla had implemented steep hidden increases. Some drivers even reported seeing $0 charges in their history, indicating broader billing confusion.
Tesla’s official Charging account on X stated that correct pricing would roll out at midnight on July 13, so the fix is already in effect. More importantly, the company announced it would waive all fees for every Supercharger session since July 2. This blanket waiver covers the entire affected period without requiring users to file individual claims, with automated refunds expected soon. The decision affects stations in PEI and nearby areas in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.
It’s a classy move, and rather than issuing partial credits or forcing owners to submit support tickets, Tesla simply absorbed the cost of the system error and made drivers whole. In an industry where hidden fees and bill disputes are common, Tesla’s proactive, no-questions-asked approach reinforces owner trust and highlights the company’s commitment to service excellence.
The incident, while disruptive for a short time, ultimately showcases Tesla’s ability to own mistakes and prioritize customer satisfaction. Atlantic Canada Tesla owners can now charge with confidence again, knowing the company has their back when technology glitches occur.
In an era of complex EV billing, such transparency and generosity are refreshing and set a positive example for the industry.