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.
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
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.
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.
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
Elon Musk’s Texas ranch to showcase the lifelong work that changed the world
