News
SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket sets reusability record, launches heaviest payload yet
SpaceX Falcon 9 booster B1051 has become the company’s ‘fleet leader’ after acing its 12th orbital-class launch and landing – a new record for the rocket family.
After a roughly 90-minute weather delay, Falcon 9 lifted off without issue around 12:48 am EST on March 19th. Booster B1051 touched down on drone ship Just Read The Instructions (JRTI) about nine minutes later, followed by the successful deployment of 53 Starlink V1.5 satellites just over an hour after launch. Starlink 4-12 was SpaceX’s 11th successful launch in the first 11 weeks of 2022. SpaceX CEO Elon Musk says that Starlink 4-12 was also the heaviest payload ever launched by Falcon 9, weighing in at 16.25 metric tons or ~35,800 pounds.
It’s not entirely clear how SpaceX was able to expand Falcon 9’s performance envelope or how far the envelope was pushed. In May 2019, Musk actually claimed that the Starlink V0.9 payload would weigh “18.5 tons” and be SpaceX’s heaviest payload ever, whereas three years later he says Starlink 4-12 set a new record of 16.25 metric tons. Assuming Musk was referring to short tons in 2019 and that SpaceX’s Starlink payload adapter and the tensioning rods that hold the stack together are roughly the same weight (~3 mT) three years later, the true total mass of Starlink 4-12’s payload could be as high as 19-19.5 metric tons (~42,000 lb). Its 53 Starlink V1.5 satellites, meanwhile, would weigh about 307 kilograms (~675 lb) each.
In other words, Starlink 4-12’s record-breaking payload could be up to 2.5 metric tons – about 15% – heavier than the Starlink V0.9 payload that set SpaceX’s internal record in 2019.
SpaceX says a Falcon 9 rocket is on track to launch Starlink 4-12 – a new batch of 53 satellites – no earlier than (NET) 11:24 pm EST on Friday, March 18th (03:24 UTC 19 March).
While ‘just’ the latest in an increasingly routine line of Starlink launches, SpaceX has confirmed that the mission will also set a new record for Falcon 9 reusability. Setting minor records is practically just as common for the average SpaceX launch but this particular record is more significant: if all goes according to plan, booster B1051 will become the first Falcon 9 first stage to complete 12 orbital-class launches and landings, pushing the envelope that much further.
The second oldest Falcon 9 booster that’s still operational, B1051 debuted in a significant way on March 2nd, 2019 by supporting Demo-1, Crew Dragon’s first uncrewed test flight. The launch was a perfect success and simultaneously kicked off the prolific careers of Crew Dragon and Falcon 9 B1051, both of which continue to have an excellent track record. Since Demo-1, B1051 has also supported the launches of Canada’s RADARSAT constellation, SiriusXM’s SXM-7 radio satellite, and 469 Starlink spacecraft spread over eight separate missions.
-->Starlink 4-12 will be its 12th launch and is set to occur just over two weeks after the third anniversary of its launch debut, translating to an average of one launch every three months or ~93 days. As an older booster and a fleet leader for several reusability milestones, B1051’s average turnaround time between launches – ~100 days – isn’t exceptionally impressive, though the booster has still accomplished a great deal.
However, newer boosters like B1058 and B1060 – both of which have much faster average turnaround times – are tied with B1051 at eleven flights each. One of the two is almost guaranteed to supersede B1051 in the very near future and become SpaceX’s new fleet leader, meaning that either B1058 or B1060 is likely to be the first to set new reusability records after B1051’s 12th flight.
Falcon 9 B1060, for example, has flown 11 times in 611 days, averaging one launch every 55 days and 61 days per reuse. B1060’s last two turnarounds have been under 50 days. B1058 is very similar. In other words, both B1058 and B1060 could feasibly overtake B1051 as early as May or June 2022 and could both potentially complete their 15th, 16th, or even 17th launches before the end of the year.
As such, this could be Falcon 9 B1051’s last opportunity to lead SpaceX’s fleet of Falcon boosters. Tune into SpaceX’s official webcast to watch Starlink 4-11 live around 11:10 pm EST (03:10 UTC).
Tesla recently released Full Self-Driving (FSD) v14.2.1, its latest version, but the tinkering with Speed Profiles has perhaps gone too far.
We try to keep it as real as possible with Full Self-Driving operation, and we are well aware that with the new versions, some things get better, but others get worse. It is all part of the process with FSD, and refinements are usually available within a week or so.
However, the latest v14.2.1 update has brought out some major complaints with Speed Profiles, at least on my end. It seems the adjustments have gone a tad too far, and there is a sizeable gap between Profiles that are next to one another.
Tesla FSD v14.2.1 first impressions:
✅ Smooth, stress-free highway operation
✅ Speed Profiles are refined — Hurry seems to be limited to 10 MPH over on highways. Switching from Mad Max to Hurry results in an abrupt braking pattern. Nothing of concern but do feel as if Speed…— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) November 29, 2025
The gap is so large that changing between them presents a bit of an unwelcome and drastic reduction in speed, which is perhaps a tad too fast for my liking. Additionally, Speed Profiles seem to have a set Speed Limit offset, which makes it less functional in live traffic situations.
Before I go any further, I’d like to remind everyone reading this that what I am about to write is purely my opinion; it is not right or wrong, or how everyone might feel. I am well aware that driving behaviors are widely subjective; what is acceptable to one might be unacceptable to another.
Speed Profiles are ‘Set’ to a Speed
From what I’ve experienced on v14.2.1, Tesla has chosen to go with somewhat of a preset max speed for each Speed Profile. With ‘Hurry,’ it appears to be 10 MPH over the speed limit, and it will not go even a single MPH faster than that. In a 55 MPH zone, it will only travel 65 MPH. Meanwhile, ‘Standard’ seems to be fixed at between 4-5 MPH over.
This is sort of a tough thing to have fixed, in my opinion. The speed at which the car travels should not be fixed; it should be more dependent on how traffic around it is traveling.
It almost seems as if the Speed Profile chosen should be more of a Behavior Profile. Standard should perform passes only to traffic that is slower than the traffic. If traffic is traveling at 75 MPH in a 65 MPH zone, the car should travel at 75 MPH. It should pass traffic that travels slower than this.
Hurry should be more willing to overtake cars, travel more than 10 MPH over the limit, and act as if someone is in a hurry to get somewhere, hence the name. Setting strict limits on how fast it will travel seems to be a real damper on its capabilities. It did much better in previous versions.
Some Speed Profiles are Too Distant from Others
This is specifically about Hurry and Mad Max, which are neighbors in the Speed Profiles menu. Hurry will only go 10 MPH over the limit, but Mad Max will travel similarly to traffic around it. I’ve seen some people say Mad Max is too slow, but I have not had that opinion when using it.
In a 55 MPH zone during Black Friday and Small Business Saturday, it is not unusual for traffic around me to travel in the low to mid-80s. Mad Max was very suitable for some traffic situations yesterday, especially as cars were traveling very fast. However, sometimes it required me to “gear down” into Hurry, especially as, at times, it would try to pass slower traffic in the right lane, a move I’m not super fond of.
We had some readers also mention this to us:
The abrupt speed reduction when switching to a slower speed profile is definitely an issue that should be improved upon.
— David Klem (@daklem) November 29, 2025
After switching from Mad Max to Hurry, there is a very abrupt drop in speed. It is not violent by any means, but it does shift your body forward, and it seems as if it is a tad drastic and could be refined further.
News
Tesla’s most affordable car is coming to the Netherlands
The trim is expected to launch at €36,990, making it the most affordable Model 3 the Dutch market has seen in years.
Tesla is preparing to introduce the Model 3 Standard to the Netherlands this December, as per information obtained by AutoWeek. The trim is expected to launch at €36,990, making it the most affordable Model 3 the Dutch market has seen in years.
While Tesla has not formally confirmed the vehicle’s arrival, pricing reportedly comes from a reliable source, the publication noted.
Model 3 Standard lands in NL
The U.S. version of the Model 3 Standard provides a clear preview of what Dutch buyers can expect, such as a no-frills configuration that maintains the recognizable Model 3 look without stripping the car down to a bare interior. The panoramic glass roof is still there, the exterior design is unchanged, and Tesla’s central touchscreen-driven cabin layout stays intact.
Cost reductions come from targeted equipment cuts. The American variant uses fewer speakers, lacks ventilated front seats and heated rear seats, and swaps premium materials for cloth and textile-heavy surfaces. Performance is modest compared with the Premium models, with a 0–100 km/h sprint of about six seconds and an estimated WLTP range near 550 kilometers.
Despite the smaller battery and simpler suspension, the Standard maintains the long-distance capability drivers have come to expect in a Tesla.
-->Pricing strategy aligns with Dutch EV demand and taxation shifts
At €36,990, the Model 3 Standard fits neatly into Tesla’s ongoing lineup reshuffle. The current Model 3 RWD has crept toward €42,000, creating space for a more competitive entry-level option, and positioning the new Model 3 Standard comfortably below the €39,990 Model Y Standard.
The timing aligns with rising Dutch demand for affordable EVs as subsidies like SEPP fade and tax advantages for electric cars continue to wind down, EVUpdate noted. Buyers seeking a no-frills EV with solid range are then likely to see the new trim as a compelling alternative.
With the U.S. variant long established and the Model Y Standard already available in the Netherlands, the appearance of an entry-level Model 3 in the Dutch configurator seems like a logical next step.
News
Tesla Model Y is still China’s best-selling premium EV through October
The premium-priced SUV outpaced rivals despite a competitive field, while the Model 3 also secured an impressive position.
The Tesla Model Y led China’s top-selling pure electric vehicles in the 200,000–300,000 RMB segment through October 2025, as per Yiche data compiled from China Passenger Car Association (CPCA) figures.
The premium-priced SUV outpaced rivals despite a competitive field, while the Model 3 also secured an impressive position.
The Model Y is still unrivaled
The Model Y’s dominance shines in Yiche’s October report, topping the chart for vehicles priced between 200,000 and 300,000 RMB. With 312,331 units retailed from January through October, the all-electric crossover was China’s best-selling EV in the 200,000–300,000 RMB segment.
The Xiaomi SU7 is a strong challenger at No. 2 with 234,521 units, followed by the Tesla Model 3, which achieved 146,379 retail sales through October. The Model Y’s potentially biggest rival, the Xiaomi YU7, is currently at No. 4 with 80,855 retail units sold.
Efficiency kings
The Model 3 and Model Y recently claimed the top two spots in Autohome’s latest real-world energy-consumption test, outperforming a broad field of Chinese-market EVs under identical 120 km/h cruising conditions with 375 kg payload and fixed 24 °C cabin temperature. The Model 3 achieved 20.8 kWh/100 km while the Model Y recorded 21.8 kWh/100 km, reaffirming Tesla’s efficiency lead.
The results drew immediate attention from Xiaomi CEO Lei Jun, who publicly recognized Tesla’s advantage while pledging continued refinement for his brand’s lineup.
-->“The Xiaomi SU7’s energy consumption performance is also very good; you can take a closer look. The fact that its test results are weaker than Tesla’s is partly due to objective reasons: the Xiaomi SU7 is a C-segment car, larger and with higher specifications, making it heavier and naturally increasing energy consumption. Of course, we will continue to learn from Tesla and further optimize its energy consumption performance!” Lei Jun wrote in a post on Weibo.
Tesla tinkering with Speed Profiles on FSD v14.2.1 has gone too far
Tesla’s most affordable car is coming to the Netherlands
