News
SpaceX to launch five South Korean military satellites by 2025
South Korea is deepening its relationship with SpaceX with a contract to launch at least five military reconnaissance satellites on Falcon 9 rockets by the end of 2025.
Known as the “425 Project,” South Korea intends to operate its own small constellation of five new Earth observation satellites: four synthetic aperture radar (SAR) satellites and one electro-optical infrared (EO/IR) satellite. All five would help ensure the near-continuous observation of sites of interest in North Korea, nominally allowing for new observations to be made at least every two hours. In a boon to South Korea’s aerospace industry, the country intends to domestically design and manufacture most or all aspects of those spacecraft. Developing domestic aerospace solutions has been a significant industrial priority for the country in recent years.
As a result, South Korea’s first stab at a domestic satellite constellation probably won’t produce record-breaking results. Publicly, the goal is to develop satellites with a maximum resolution of 0.3-0.5 meters (1-1.6 ft) per pixel – similar to the publicly established capabilities of most modern mid-sized Earth observation satellites. However, the classified capabilities of the US military and US spy agencies may offer several times that resolving power. South Korea is a close ally of the United States and likely benefits significantly from shared US intelligence. But it’s still no surprise that a country with such a belligerent neighbor would want to own and operate its own fleet of reconnaissance satellites and have the ability to independently produce its own spacecraft.
On top of working on those spacecraft, South Korea has also been developing a fully domestic orbital launch capability. The Korea Aerospace Research Institute (KARI) attempted to launch the first fully completed Korean Satellite Launch Vehicle II (KSLV-2) – also known as Nuri – in October 2021 but fell just short of orbit after its first and second stages performed nominally but its third stage ran into pressurization issues. Nuri is scheduled to return to flight as early as June 15th, 2022. Once operational, the South Korean rocket is designed to launch up to 2.6 tons (~5700 lb) to low Earth orbit (LEO) and 1.5 tons (~3300 lb) to a slightly higher sun-synchronous orbit (SSO).
South Korea’s decision to manifest its 425 Project satellites on SpaceX rockets thus raises some questions about South Korea’s confidence in – or plans to use – its own homegrown launch capabilities. Assuming Nuri more or less meets its performance goals and successfully reaches orbit during its second launch attempt in mid-2022, both of which seem plausible, the rocket would likely be more than capable of beginning operational launches no later than 2023. In fact, South Korea says that its EO/IR satellite – scheduled to launch first – will weigh around 800 kilograms (~1750 lb), making it a near-perfect fit for Nuri’s first operational launch. Such a small payload would give the rocket a large safety margin to account for any unexpected performance losses.
Instead, South Korea has decided to launch all five spacecraft on SpaceX rockets. SpaceX already has a solid relationship with the country: the company recently launched its Lockheed Martin-built ANASIS-II military communications satellite and is scheduled to launch KARI’s Korean Pathfinder Lunar Orbiter (KPLO) – South Korea’s first mission beyond Earth orbit – no earlier than August 2022.
It’s unclear if SpaceX will launch South Korea’s ‘425’ satellites individually on dedicated Falcon 9s, as rideshare payloads alongside other paying customers, or – in the case of the four SAR satellites – in batches of two or four. KPLO will be a Falcon 9 rideshare payload, making it clear that South Korea is happy to exploit cost-effective rideshare launches – though that calculus may change for military payloads. Regardless, South Korea’s latest contract won’t hurt SpaceX’s commercial manifest, which currently includes around 75 publicly-acknowledged Falcon launches.
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
