News
SpaceX planning four more Falcon 9-launched Starlink missions this year, permits show
According to a suite of eight FCC Special Temporary Authority licenses SpaceX filed for on August 30th, the company has plans for as many as four additional Starlink satellite launches in 2019, on top of Starlink’s May 23rd launch debut.
Additionally, SpaceX simultaneously requested that the FCC modify its current Starlink application to permit a slight change in orbital characteristics that would drastically improve the broadband satellite constellation’s coverage in its early stages. Combined, SpaceX appears to be extremely confident about the status and near-future progress to be made by its prospective Starlink constellation, confidence presumably inspired by the performance of the first 60 “v0.9” satellites launched three months ago.
Beta-test hiccups
Over the last three months, 50 of the 60 Starlink satellites launched on May 23rd have made their way to their final ~550 km (340 mi) circular orbits. As observed by astronomer Jonathan McDowell and partially confirmed by SpaceX’s own official statements, the company remains in contact with and – more or less – in control of all but three of the 60 Starlink prototypes. SpaceX did confirm in late June that two functioning satellites were being intentionally deorbited to test procedures and performance, while another three satellites had partially failed and were to “passively deorbit”.
And for completeness here is an updated version of the plot showing Starlink satellite height ((p+a)/2) versus time, no recent changes pic.twitter.com/E3a38afRse— Jonathan McDowell (@planet4589) August 28, 2019
Based on the phrasing of SpaceX’s June 28th update, it’s ambiguous if communication and/or control has been completely lost with those three satellites. Additionally, five more satellites have remained paused partway between their ~440 km insertion orbits and ~550 km operational orbits, described two months ago as “going through checkouts prior to completing their orbit raise.” For unknown reasons, that orbit raise never happened. This leaves SpaceX with 57 of 60 satellites that have effectively ‘survived’ and are still under some form of control, while 50 (83%) of the satellites have successfully reached their nominal operational orbits and are performing as intended.
SpaceX continues to waffle between describing these first 60 satellites – internally known as “Starlink v0.9” – as a development test and the first operational Starlink launch. A ~17% failure rate for satellite orbit raising would be unacceptable for a finished product but, on a positive note, is actually quite impressive if one assumes that the 60 spacecraft are high-fidelity prototypes, not operational satellites.
In short, there is a lot of room for improvement – particularly in the realm of short and long-term reliability – but the likely fact that “v0.9” signifies a sort of Starlink beta test means that SpaceX’s next Starlink launches will feature updated and bug-fixed hardware. In the realm of satellites, the practice of flying prototypes as early as possible and risking failures to learn from experience is exceedingly rare, but this behavior is entirely consistent with SpaceX’s preferred approach to rocket and spacecraft development.
300 satellites, 7 months
As mentioned above, SpaceX applied for four FCC STA licenses – effectively communications-related launch permits – on August 30th, all for Starlink missions with nominal No Earlier Than (NET) launch dates in 2019. It must be noted that it’s exceptionally rare for the starting dates of STAs to actually correlate with launch dates, but a best-case scenario typically sees a given launch occur within a handful of weeks of that date. STAs last six months, providing plenty of buffer for all but the most extreme launch delays.
| Mission | Date (NET) |
| Starlink-1 | October 10th |
| Starlink-2 | October 25th |
| Starlink-3 | November 13th |
| Starlink-4 | December 8th |
Of note, NASASpaceflight.com recently published Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS) and Kennedy Space Center (KSC) planning dates for SpaceX’s next two Starlink missions, confirming that the company is planning for launches roughly one week after the dates on its newly-requested FCC STAs. Those official planning dates show two back-to-back Starlink launches no earlier than (NET) October 17th and November 4th.
In a best-case scenario where SpaceX successfully manufactures, delivers, and prepares the satellites and readies the Falcon 9 rockets assigned to launch them, the company could complete four more Starlink launches between now and the New Year. Sticking to a three-week cadence hopefully set by Starlink-1 and Starlink-2, two more launches could follow around late-November and mid-December. Of course, as just the first few truly operational launches of more or less finalized “v1.0” Starlink satellites, delays from manufacturing through launch flows are probable and should be expected.
Even completing just one more 60-satellite launch of an updated Starlink design would be an impressive achievement, making SpaceX the first and only entity – country or company – to place more than 100 satellites in orbit in the first year of a satellite system’s launch activities. In a best-case scenario, four additional Starlink launches in 2019 would abruptly take SpaceX from two satellite prototypes to operating almost 300 satellites – unequivocally the largest constellation in the world – in no more than seven months.
Serving customers sooner
According to SpaceX’s Starlink.com website, Starlink will be able to start serving customers at Northern US and southern Canadian latitudes after just six launches (360 satellites), with limited “global coverage of the populated world” available after 24 launches (1440 satellites). However, per an FCC license modification request published on August 30th, the same day as 8 launch STAs, the company believes it can dramatically expedite Starlink coverage (regardless of launch rate) with one relatively simple modification.
This modification would leave inclination (orbit angle relative to Earth’s rotational axis), orbital altitude, and the number of satellites and launches completely unchanged, modifying Starlink’s orbital planes instead. It’s an extreme simplification of the reality of orbital mechanics, but one can imagine orbital planes as roughly akin to lanes on a road. To increase their reach, SpaceX wants to deploy Starlink satellites to three separate planes each launch, ultimately tripling the number of ‘lanes’ (from 24 to 72) while cutting the number of satellites in each ‘lane’ by two-thirds (from 66 to 22). In this analogy, it is logically easier to build fewer ‘lanes’, referring – in this case – to the challenge it poses to the launch vehicle, satellites, or both. SpaceX would only be able to triple Starlink’s orbital ‘lanes’ by requiring the satellites to do the bulk of their own orbit raising, leaning heavily on the performance and reliability of their SpaceX-built electric (ion) propulsion.
According to SpaceX, this could as much as halve the number of launches needed to achieve a given level of Starlink coverage, meaning that SpaceX’s early constellation could reach its initial operational status up to twice as quickly. SpaceX believes that this updated orbital layout of Starlink’s 1584 low Earth orbit (LEO) satellites would also significantly improve coverage and capabilities for areas with high population density (i.e. big cities).
Whether or not the FCC sees fit to rapidly grant SpaceX’s modification request in the next ~8 weeks, SpaceX’s next Starlink launches will be a major step forward for the company’s nascent communications constellation.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
Tesla rolled out Full Self-Driving version 14.2 yesterday to members of the Early Access Program (EAP). Expectations were high, and Tesla surely delivered.
With the rollout of Tesla FSD v14.2, there were major benchmarks for improvement from the v14.1 suite, which spanned across seven improvements. Our final experience with v14.1 was with v14.1.7, and to be honest, things were good, but it felt like there were a handful of regressions from previous iterations.
While there were improvements in brake stabbing and hesitation, we did experience a few small interventions related to navigation and just overall performance. It was nothing major; there were no critical takeovers that required any major publicity, as they were more or less subjective things that I was not particularly comfortable with. Other drivers might have been more relaxed.
With v14.2 hitting our cars yesterday, there were a handful of things we truly noticed in terms of improvement, most notably the lack of brake stabbing and hesitation, a major complaint with v14.1.x.
However, in a 62-minute drive that was fully recorded, there were a lot of positives, and only one true complaint, which was something we haven’t had issues with in the past.
The Good
Lack of Brake Stabbing and Hesitation
Perhaps the most notable and publicized issue with v14.1.x was the presence of brake stabbing and hesitation. Arriving at intersections was particularly nerve-racking on the previous version simply because of this. At four-way stops, the car would not be assertive enough to take its turn, especially when other vehicles at the same intersection would inch forward or start to move.
This was a major problem.
However, there were no instances of this yesterday on our lengthy drive. It was much more assertive when arriving at these types of scenarios, but was also more patient when FSD knew it was not the car’s turn to proceed.
Can report on v14.2 today there were ZERO instances of break stabbing or hesitation at intersections today
It was a significant improvement from v14.1.x
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) November 21, 2025
This improvement was the most noticeable throughout the drive, along with fixes in overall smoothness.
Speed Profiles Seem to Be More Reasonable
There were a handful of FSD v14 users who felt as if the loss of a Max Speed setting was a negative. However, these complaints will, in our opinion, begin to subside, especially as things have seemed to be refined quite nicely with v14.2.
Freeway driving is where this is especially noticeable. If it’s traveling too slow, just switch to a faster profile. If it’s too fast, switch to a slower profile. However, the speeds seem to be much more defined with each Speed Profile, which is something that I really find to be a huge advantage. Previously, you could tell the difference in speeds, but not in driving styles. At times, Standard felt a lot like Hurry. Now, you can clearly tell the difference between the two.
It seems as if Tesla made a goal that drivers should be able to tell which Speed Profile is active if it was not shown on the screen. With v14.1.x, this was not necessarily something that could be done. With v14.2, if someone tested me on which Speed Profile was being used, I’m fairly certain I could pick each one.
Better Overall Operation
I felt, at times, especially with v14.1.7, there were some jerky movements. Nothing that was super alarming, but there were times when things just felt a little more finicky than others.
v14.2 feels much smoother overall, with really great decision-making, lane changes that feel second nature, and a great speed of travel. It was a very comfortable ride.
The Bad
Parking
It feels as if there was a slight regression in parking quality, as both times v14.2 pulled into parking spots, I would have felt compelled to adjust manually if I were staying at my destinations. For the sake of testing, at my first destination, I arrived, allowed the car to park, and then left. At the tail-end of testing, I walked inside the store that FSD v14.2 drove me to, so I had to adjust the parking manually.
This was pretty disappointing. Apart from parking at Superchargers, which is always flawless, parking performance is something that needs some attention. The release notes for v14.2. state that parking spot selection and parking quality will improve with future versions.
Any issues with parking on your end? 14.1.7 didn’t have this trouble with parking pic.twitter.com/JPLRO2obUj
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) November 21, 2025
However, this was truly my only complaint about v14.2.
You can check out our full 62-minute ride-along below:
Elon Musk
SpaceX issues statement on Starship V3 Booster 18 anomaly
The incident unfolded during gas-system pressure testing at the company’s Massey facility in Starbase, Texas.
SpaceX has issued an initial statement about Starship Booster 18’s anomaly early Friday. The incident unfolded during gas-system pressure testing at the company’s Massey facility in Starbase, Texas.
SpaceX’s initial comment
As per SpaceX in a post on its official account on social media platform X, Booster 18 was undergoing gas system pressure tests when the anomaly happened. Despite the nature of the incident, the company emphasized that no propellant was loaded, no engines were installed, and personnel were kept at a safe distance from the booster, resulting in zero injuries.
“Booster 18 suffered an anomaly during gas system pressure testing that we were conducting in advance of structural proof testing. No propellant was on the vehicle, and engines were not yet installed. The teams need time to investigate before we are confident of the cause. No one was injured as we maintain a safe distance for personnel during this type of testing. The site remains clear and we are working plans to safely reenter the site,” SpaceX wrote in its post on X.
Incident and aftermath
Livestream footage from LabPadre showed Booster 18’s lower half crumpling around the liquid oxygen tank area at approximately 4:04 a.m. CT. Subsequent images posted by on-site observers revealed extensive deformation across the booster’s lower structure. Needless to say, spaceflight observers have noted that Booster 18 would likely be a complete loss due to its anomaly.
Booster 18 had rolled out only a day earlier and was one of the first vehicles in the Starship V3 program. The V3 series incorporates structural reinforcements and reliability upgrades intended to prepare Starship for rapid-reuse testing and eventual tower-catch operations. Elon Musk has been optimistic about Starship V3, previously noting on X that the spacecraft might be able to complete initial missions to Mars.
Investor's Corner
Tesla analyst maintains $500 PT, says FSD drives better than humans now
The team also met with Tesla leaders for more than an hour to discuss autonomy, chip development, and upcoming deployment plans.
Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) received fresh support from Piper Sandler this week after analysts toured the Fremont Factory and tested the company’s latest Full Self-Driving software. The firm reaffirmed its $500 price target, stating that FSD V14 delivered a notably smooth robotaxi demonstration and may already perform at levels comparable to, if not better than, average human drivers.
The team also met with Tesla leaders for more than an hour to discuss autonomy, chip development, and upcoming deployment plans.
Analysts highlight autonomy progress
During more than 75 minutes of focused discussions, analysts reportedly focused on FSD v14’s updates. Piper Sandler’s team pointed to meaningful strides in perception, object handling, and overall ride smoothness during the robotaxi demo.
The visit also included discussions on updates to Tesla’s in-house chip initiatives, its Optimus program, and the growth of the company’s battery storage business. Analysts noted that Tesla continues refining cost structures and capital expenditure expectations, which are key elements in future margin recovery, as noted in a Yahoo Finance report.
Analyst Alexander Potter noted that “we think FSD is a truly impressive product that is (probably) already better at driving than the average American.” This conclusion was strengthened by what he described as a “flawless robotaxi ride to the hotel.”
Street targets diverge on TSLA
While Piper Sandler stands by its $500 target, it is not the highest estimate on the Street. Wedbush, for one, has a $600 per share price target for TSLA stock.
Other institutions have also weighed in on TSLA stock as of late. HSBC reiterated a Reduce rating with a $131 target, citing a gap between earnings fundamentals and the company’s market value. By contrast, TD Cowen maintained a Buy rating and a $509 target, pointing to strong autonomous driving demonstrations in Austin and the pace of software-driven improvements.
Stifel analysts also lifted their price target for Tesla to $508 per share over the company’s ongoing robotaxi and FSD programs.
Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.2 – Full Review, the Good and the Bad
SpaceX issues statement on Starship V3 Booster 18 anomaly
