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.
News
Tesla Full Self-Driving insurance program with heavy discount expands
Lemonade has expanded its innovative Autonomous Car insurance program to Tennessee, giving Tesla owners in the state a substantial discount on Full Self-Driving (FSD) miles. Announced on August 3, the product offers 50 percent off every mile driven with FSD activated, positioning the digital insurer as a leader in pricing insurance around autonomous technology.
The program, marketed as Lemonade Autonomous Car insurance, uses a direct connection via Tesla’s Fleet API (with customer permission) to automatically distinguish FSD-engaged miles from manual driving. Policyholders pay a low base rate when the vehicle is stationary and a few cents per mile when moving, with the 50 percent reduction applied specifically to FSD miles.
If you’re driving a Tesla in Tennessee, FSD miles now cost 50% less to insure with Lemonade. Autonomous Car is now live in TN.https://t.co/4CDTuhyORi pic.twitter.com/QZk4LBIs6f
— Lemonade (@Lemonade_Inc) August 3, 2026
Coverage includes standard protections such as liability, collision, comprehensive, roadside assistance, and Tesla-specific benefits like access to certified repair shops and emergency crash services. Eligible vehicles require Hardware 4, as well as recent firmware.
Lemonade first unveiled the product on January 21 of this year, describing it as a first-of-its-kind offering designed for self-driving cars, starting with Tesla FSD. It began rolling out in Arizona on January 26, followed by Oregon about a month later. Subsequent expansions brought it to Indiana in early June 2026 and Colorado later that month.
Tennessee marks the fifth state.
Tesla Full Self-Driving gets outrageous insurance offer with insanely cheap rates
The discount rests on Lemonade’s strong belief in the safety of Tesla’s FSD system. The company cites Tesla’s data showing that FSD-driven miles are twice as safe as those driven manually, or associated with roughly a 50 percent crash reduction.
Lemonade Co-founder and President Shai Wininger has emphasized this distinction: “Traditional insurers treat a Tesla like any other car, and AI like any other driver. But a car that sees 360 degrees, never gets drowsy, and reacts in milliseconds can’t be compared to a human.”
He added that “Teslas driven with FSD are involved in far fewer accidents” and committed that as FSD software improves and becomes safer, Lemonade’s prices will drop further.
Tesla Full Self-Driving gets an offer to be insured for ‘almost free’
This approach leverages Lemonade’s existing pay-per-mile technology and AI-driven risk models, which analyze nuanced vehicle data including software version and sensor performance. The company expects the model to reward higher FSD usage with greater savings while supporting mixed households that include both Tesla and non-Tesla vehicles under one policy. Bundling with home, renters, or pet insurance can yield additional discounts.
As autonomous driving technology advances, Lemonade’s state-by-state expansion of usage-based pricing that directly reflects real-world safety data represents a notable shift in how insurers evaluate risk.
Tesla owners in the five available states – Arizona, Oregon, Indiana, Colorado, and now Tennessee – can obtain quotes quickly through the Lemonade app or website, potentially lowering the overall cost of ownership for vehicles equipped with advanced driver-assistance systems. Further states are expected as regulatory approvals progress.
Cybertruck
Tesla quietly made the Cybertruck even stronger
Tesla has continued to flex the strength, rigidity, and robustness of its all-electric pickup, the Cybertruck. In fact, since 2019, Cybertruck’s ability to avoid dents, dings, and even gunfire has been one of the main selling points Tesla has used to attract buyers who are looking for a vehicle that can handle the most intense challenges.
But that does not mean Tesla is not still actively trying to make it even better.
In a new hardware update, Tesla has decided to change the material of the Cybertruck’s underbody panels from aluminum to carbon fiber, a move that aims to not only increase pricing efficiency but also improve strength.
RELATED:
Cybertruck Lead Engineer Wes Morrill confirmed the change was made to the Cybertruck recently after it was spotted by Coleton Guerin of Out of Spec. This particular trim level was a Cyberbeast, but it is being applied to all trims to keep supply chain efficiency high and have less variance across trim levels.
Morrill said that Tesla tested different materials for the underbody panel protection, and carbon fiber performed better than aluminum, which is what the company was using since its first deliveries in 2023.
Additionally, there are some efficiency improvements because Tesla can better form the areas around the bolts to keep underbody airflow cleaner than previously.
good eye – it’s a new material. Testing showed it to be more durable than the aluminum while being lower weight and cost. Also slight efficiency improvement since we can better form the areas around the bolts to keep the underbody airflow cleaner than what stamped aluminum allows
— Wes (@wmorrill3) July 30, 2026
Carbon fiber is traditionally lighter and more durable than aluminum, which is why it is such a popular material among luxury automakers, and EV makers will utilize some of the materials around battery packs to save weight.
This is the first instance of Tesla utilizing carbon fiber on the Cybertruck’s exterior to help with overall performance and strength. As previously mentioned, Tesla used aluminum to protect the underside of the body, but it is pretty typical for the company to continue making engineering changes that will improve the car in the future.
News
Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.3.7 early review: FSD saved me from an accident
Tesla released Full Self-Driving version 14.3.7 yesterday, and after about 90 miles of testing today, it is evident there are some definite fixes from version 14.3.6, which I wrote about last week and called a regression.
Within the first 40 minutes of my drive on v14.3.7, it saved me from getting into an accident with an unaware Dodge Charger driver, and some of the things Tesla seemed to miss in v14.3.6 were definitely improved. All in all, the release so far has some really great performance, and I’m looking forward to testing it further.
For now, here’s everything I noticed with v14.3.7:
Overall Improvement
Just generally speaking from a ride perspective, this was a really great experience. A lot of the hesitancy I experienced on v14.3.6 was gone. There were no instances of brake-stabbing, wheel-jerking, or any uncertain or unconfident movements. It was void of anything that I felt made it timid with v14.3.6.
The one thing I do hope to see down the road is a smaller need to adjust Speed Profiles so often. Because Tesla calls FSD “Supervised,” I’m okay with needing to hit the scroll wheel a few times a drive.
However, I hope that things can be incrementally improved upon with speed. Sometimes it’s too fast; other times it’s too slow. It’s a difficult thing to hone in and refine, but I hope it eventually gets there.
I didn’t notice any significant left lane camping or any behaviors that were completely out of line. I am hopeful that this opinion does not change, but after driving a few days with this version and putting it in a variety of different situations, you are exposed to more behaviors, some of which are not necessarily what I’d prefer.
The big things to notice, at least in my experience thus far, are that the major issues with previous versions — meaning the braking stabbing and wheel jerking — simply weren’t there. That’s enough to already consider this progress compared to .6.
Manual Signal Override is More Responsive
On .6, I had quite a few issues with FSD ignoring my manually input turn signals. If Tesla wants to call it “Supervised,” then the car should not ignore any input the driver gives. If I touch the accelerator on FSD, the car speeds up.
🚨 Tesla FSD v14.3.7 obeying manual turn signals https://t.co/6eqToXpQfC pic.twitter.com/vHBlFQ4PDV
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) August 2, 2026
The car did a great job of obeying my turn signals when I wanted it to change lanes, which is welcome.
Parking Lot Performance
Before .6, I traditionally took over in nearly every parking lot my car entered, because I knew it would not park somewhere that I wanted, and usually, it was just a tad too timid in this setting.
The one bright spot of .6 was how well it handled parking lots. This continued with v14.3.7:
I’m always really happy to see progress at all, but once parking preferences come to FSD, as long as this performance is still around, that could potentially be the biggest improvement I’ve seen in FSD in the year I’ve been using it personally on a daily basis.
Full Self-Driving Averts Disaster
A Dodge Charger changed into my lane without checking if I was there, running me off the road. FSD made the initial avoidance maneuver; I grabbed the wheel out of instinct, looked in my side mirror to ensure I had nobody following closely behind, hit the brake, and straightened the car back up to avoid a curb:
🚨 Guys this is why you all NEED to stay vigilant behind the wheel, even on Tesla Full Self-Driving
Human drivers are UNHINGED and have no idea what they’re doing anymore. This was a kid obviously younger than 20 years old with zero awareness.
First drive with v14.3.7 https://t.co/1vTbCMpCn8 pic.twitter.com/lz7KKEF6bj
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) August 2, 2026
There have been quite a few responses to this video stating that I should never have grabbed the wheel. To be honest, I really wish I had not done so, because I do believe FSD would have avoided any sort of collision with anything, including the car or the curb.
However, this was the first time I had ever been this close to being hit while using FSD. My natural reaction was to take over. I think if I had had something like this happen before, my reaction might have been different.
Hitting the brake avoided hitting the curb, while FSD swerved to avoid the car. My concern after the car was clear of my front end was the curb. All in all, I’m really happy with how things turned out, and I think anyone could be a critic of how I handled it. I only had a split second to really make a decision, and thankfully, any damage was avoided.
It is clear FSD managed to avoid the car coming down before I was able to. I truly credit FSD for avoiding the collision.
What Needs to Improve
Better Recognition of Potholes, Uneven Roads, Sharp Changes in Roadway/Bumps
On Friday, my Fianceè and I were in the car, and FSD was driving us. We crossed over a roadway that has a traffic light, and FSD was traveling at 40 MPH on Standard, 5 MPH over the speed limit. Everything was more than reasonable.
However, the road we were crossing at the light has a major bump both as you start and finish crossing it. Without a speed reduction, your car can go airborne. The Tesla did just this on Friday on v14.3.6; it was an uncomfortable bounce that pretty much confirmed I would not ever let FSD go over again unless we were sitting at that intersection when there is a red light.
I even tried scrolling down into Sloth quickly, but I ended up just taking over:
This is that big bounce that I mentioned in the quoted post.
It’s just a tad too drastic to take at the speed FSD wants to go over it. You can see me quickly swipe down into Sloth, but I intervened. https://t.co/K20PK9ysBg pic.twitter.com/81Oc82ZJcZ
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) August 2, 2026
A few people have said it remains related to the vision-based approach and its difficulty comprehending 3D. This is a huge issue because this can cause serious damage at certain speeds.
Navigation
Nothing new here. I still turn off “Online Routing” quite frequently to get the car to take logical routes from time to time.
Auto Wipers
Auto Wipers are just plain bad. I really hope Tesla just uses a rain sensor. I thought they had improved at one point, but I still get dry wipes, Speed 4 on a drizzle, and Speed 2 on a steady rain. In reality, these should be switched.
You can watch our full review of Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.3.7 below:
🚨 Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.3.7 saved me from an accident! FULL REVIEW: https://t.co/1vTbCMpCn8 pic.twitter.com/9mHmKVoMVA
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) August 2, 2026

