News
SpaceX set to deploy another large batch of internet satellites as Starlink constellation expands
For the third time in less than four weeks, SpaceX has announced a new 60-satellite Starlink mission, making it the second Starlink launch scheduled in the first month of the new year.
This mission will be the company’s fifth dedicated Starlink launch, referring to the fact that SpaceX is using all of the performance of Falcon 9 for its own internal purposes. Comprised of 60 flat-packed satellites, SpaceX completed its first dedicated Starlink launch – known as Starlink v0.9 – in May 2019, followed by the first launch of 60 finalized “Starlink v1.0” satellites on November 11th, a mission known as Starlink-1.
Barring delays, the next Starlink v1.0 launch – Starlink-2 – will be SpaceX’s 14th and final launch of the year and is scheduled to lift off no earlier than 11:40 pm ET, December 30th (03:40 UTC, Dec 31), a mission the company announced on November 24th. Barely two weeks later, SpaceX announced media accreditation for Starlink-3, scheduled to launch in January 2020.
Now, just ten days after announcing Starlink-3, SpaceX has announced plans for Starlink-4. Scheduled to launch no earlier than “late-January”, Starlink-4 is now the third Starlink mission SpaceX has announced in less than four weeks, all three of which are scheduled to launch within the next six weeks.
As previously discussed on Teslarati, the fact that SpaceX announced two Starlink missions in two weeks meshed well with the company’s goal of performing up to 24 dedicated Starlink launches in 2020.
“Barely two weeks after SpaceX opened media accreditation for Starlink-2, the second launch of finalized ‘v1.0’ satellites and third dedicated launch overall, the company has announced that that late-December mission will be followed by another Starlink launch in January 2020. This tracks almost exactly with SpaceX’s reported plans for as many as 24 dedicated Starlink launches in 2020, a feat that would singlehandedly break SpaceX’s current record of 21 launches performed in a single year.”
Eric Ralph — December 10th, 2019
With SpaceX’s December 19th’s Starlink-4 announcement, it’s now abundantly clear that the company is putting its money where its mouth is with respect to what might otherwise be perceived as a Muskian pie-in-the-sky target. CEO Elon Musk is (in)famous for his tendency to sketch out timelines that probably are theoretically possible but inevitably fall prey to the numerous challenges often faced during ambitious aerospace projects.
As of now, SpaceX took a bit less than six months to go from its first 60-satellite Starlink v0.9 launch to its first Starlink v1.0 launch (Starlink-1). If schedules hold, SpaceX’s second Starlink v1.0 launch – Starlink-2 – will lift off about six weeks after Starlink-1, while Starlink-3 could follow just 1-2 weeks later in January 2020.
This is all to say that SpaceX is perfectly setting itself up for an average of two Starlink launches per month next year, so long as it continues to announce new missions every 2-3 weeks. Even if SpaceX falls short of that ambition due to any number of technical hurdles that could pop up next year, 15 or 20 Starlink launches would give the company a Starlink constellation more than a thousand satellites strong.
In recent months, SpaceX has indicated that Starlink will need at least 24 dedicated launches – 1440 satellites – to achieve uninterrupted global coverage, while as few as six launches (300 satellites) could enable service for customers in the northern US and southern Canada.
SpaceX COO and President Gwynne Shotwell believes the company can begin serving customers as early as mid-2020, ultimately maturing into an experienced internet service provider (ISP) in 2021. With almost 120 satellites already in orbit, if SpaceX can manage an average of 1.5 to 2 Starlink launches per month in 2020, the broadband internet constellation will have near-global coverage before the start of 2021.
For now, it looks like the first few months of the next decade will be jam-packed with SpaceX Starlink launches, not to mention the customer launches the company intends to complete on top of its own internal manifest.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
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
