News
SpaceX ships head to sea for fifth upgraded GPS satellite launch [webcast]
Two SpaceX ships have headed to sea to recover parts of Falcon 9 after the rocket’s fifth upgraded GPS III satellite launch for the US military.
On Tuesday, SpaceX confirmed that Falcon 9 is scheduled to launch GPS III Space Vehicle 06 (SV06) no earlier than (NET) 7:10 am EST (12:10 UTC) on Wednesday, January 18th. Built by Lockheed Martin for an average of $610 million each [PDF], the payload is the sixth of ten upgraded GPS III satellites and weighs around 4.35 tons (~9600 lb). Its eventual destination is a circular Medium Earth Orbit (MEO) around 20,200 kilometers (12,550 mi) above Earth’s surface, where it will join dozens of other GPS satellites.
If past trends continue, SpaceX’s two-stage Falcon 9 rocket will be tasked with launching GPS III SV06 to a transfer orbit measuring around 400 kilometers by 20,200 kilometers. The satellite will then use its own propulsion system and propellant to raise its perigee and enter a circular, operational orbit.
The update that's rolling out to the fleet makes full use of the front and rear steering travel to minimize turning circle. In this case a reduction of 1.6 feet just over the air— Wes (@wmorrill3) April 16, 2024
SpaceX will then attempt to recover Falcon 9’s reusable booster on drone ship A Shortfall of Gravitas (ASOG), which will be stationed about 640 kilometers (~400 mi) northeast of the company’s Cape Canaveral Space Force Station LC-40 launch pad. ASOG was towed to sea on Friday, January 13th. Used once before to launch four astronauts on SpaceX’s Crew-5 mission, Falcon 9 B1077 will reportedly launch GPS III SV06, becoming the second flight-proven rocket to launch a GPS III satellite.
770 kilometers (~460 mi) downrange, recovery ship Doug – which left port on January 15th – will try to fish Falcon 9’s GPS III SV06 payload fairing halves out of the ocean for reuse. Fairing recovery and reuse have quietly become almost as reliable and routine as Falcon booster recovery. SpaceX is still the only company or group to successfully reuse an orbital-class rocket’s fairing.
GPS III SV06 will be SpaceX’s fifth upgraded GPS satellite launch since December 2018. The mission is part of a block of four contracts that represent a minor revolution in US military launch procurement. During SpaceX’s first GPS III launch, the company was forced to expend an entire Falcon 9 rocket – likely out of an abundance of caution and at the request of the US Air Force. For its three subsequent GPS III launches, SpaceX was able to recover each Falcon 9 booster while still launching the payload to the same orbit as the first expendable mission.
Soon after that first success, SpaceX won a contract worth $290.5 million for three more GPS III launches. At some point, the US military reassessed the situation and decided that SpaceX’s reusable Falcon boosters were becoming reliable enough to safely launch military payloads. The Space Force ultimately renegotiated its contract with SpaceX to allow the company to launch GPS III SV05 and SV06 on reused Falcon 9 boosters, reducing the total cost to the taxpayer to $226.5 million.
After GPS III SV06, the Space Force only has one GPS III launch contract left – using a ULA Vulcan rocket that has yet to fly. The three remaining GPS III satellites still need launch contracts, and the first tranche of ten GPS III satellites will be followed by up to 22 GPS IIIF Follow On satellites that will also need launches. Given the company’s track record and lower prices, SpaceX will likely be tasked with launching a large portion of those future satellites throughout the 2020s and into the 2030s.
Tune in below around 6:55 am EST (11:55 UTC) to watch SpaceX’s fifth GPS III launch live.
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
