News
SpaceX’s Starlink eyed by US military as co. raises $500-750M for development
In a reasonably predictable turn of events, SpaceX has been awarded a healthy $28.7M contract to study, develop, and test possible military applications of its prospective Starlink internet satellite constellation.
Previously reported by Teslarati in August 2018, FCC applications related to Starlink revealed that SpaceX had plans to develop and test Starlink interconnectivity with conformal antenna arrays installed on aircraft, all but directly pointing to military involvement with a reference to the need for aerial maneuvers “[representative] of a high-performance aircraft.”
The Air Force just gave @SpaceX $28.7 million for Starlink experimentation. https://t.co/fr2bBHJkDN
— Eric Berger (@SciGuySpace) December 21, 2018
Around the same time as those FCC documents surfaced, the US Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) spoke with AviationWeek about plans to experiment with the potential capabilities offered by a flurry of proposed low Earth orbit (LEO) internet satellite constellations, including the likes of SpaceX’s Starlink, OneWeb, a Telesat network, and others. While no specific companies were fingered in AFRL’s public statements, it was far too convenient to be a coincidence. Four months later, the below transaction was published in the Department of Defense’s running list of new contract awards:
“[SpaceX], Hawthorne, California, has been awarded a $28,713,994 competitive, firm-fixed-price … agreement for experimentation … in the areas of establishing connectivity [and] operational experimentation … [and] will include connectivity demonstrations to Air Force ground sites and aircraft for experimental purposes. For the proposed Phase 2, the awardee proposes to perform experiments [with] early versions of a commercial space-to-space data relay service and mobile connectivity directly from space to aircraft.” – Department of Defense, FBO FA8650-17-S-9300
Those dots were fairly easy to connect earlier this year, but this agreement confirms the apparent arrangement with certainty. Almost three months after SpaceX could have received its initial funding, it’s possible that the company has already begun basic testing along the described lines with the two prototype Starlink satellites currently in orbit, although no FCC or FAA filings (that I am aware of) have suggested that those tests are ongoing. SpaceX may be waiting for the launch of a second generation of Starlink prototype satellites to begin seriously putting its antenna and communications technologies through their mid-air paces.
SpaceX seeks approval for Starlink internet tests on high-performance govt. planes https://t.co/FSUFgFXOQW
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) August 15, 2018
Early answers to the biggest question
At this point in time, the viability and potential utility of Starlink and other large LEO constellations are well established. What has not been established, however, is how exactly any of the proposed constellations – especially Starlink – can go from paper to orbit. In other words, the reasonable question to ask of any company pursuing such an endeavor is how they plan to fund the acquisition of capital-intensive manufacturing infrastructure and launch services.
Ultimately, SpaceX will receive $19.1M of the full $28.7M sum from the DoD in FY2019 (Oct 1, 2018 to Sept 30, 2019). This absolutely dwarfs all other contracts awarded thus far under the AFRL’s Defense Experimentation Using Commercial Space Internet (DEUCSI) program, which began in August 2017 and has since awarded $2.5M and $5.6M contracts to Iridium and L3, respectively. In the grand scheme of things, ~$30M is a pittance in the face of the extensive investments SpaceX needs to make if it hopes to mass-produce high-performance satellites at a truly unprecedented scale.
- An unofficial analysis of SpaceX’s first ~1600 Starlink satellites. (Mark Handley)
- One of the first two prototype Starlink satellites separates from Falcon 9’s upper stage, February 2018. (SpaceX)
- SpaceX’s Starlink satellite constellation efforts could provide the company with valuable experience that can be applied around Mars. (unofficial logo by Eric Ralph)
This is where a duo of major investment and fundraising developments come into play. In the last several months, word has gotten out that SpaceX secured a respectable $250M loan through the sale of debt, and more recently wrapped up an equity investment round to the tune of $500M, playing off of long-time investors with a demonstrated interest in belief in the company’s long-term vision. For unknown reasons, SpaceX had originally looked into raising the full $750M through a debt-equity loan, but – despite reports that its market was very healthy – soon cut the offering to $500M and eventually $250M, which it ultimately secured in November. Combined with a traditional $500M equity-investment uncovered earlier this month, SpaceX appears to have nearly completed fundraising of more than $750M in the second half of 2018 alone.
.@WSJ reports that @SpaceX is raising $500M to get its #Starlink broadband satellite service off the ground: https://t.co/dQTKE10NpB H/T @RolfeWinkler pic.twitter.com/ufx02xNWLv
— Alan Boyle 👽 (@b0yle) December 18, 2018
Put a different way, SpaceX has very rapidly gotten very serious about doubling down on Starlink. According to the Wall Street Journal, who originally broke the news of a new $500M equity round, that funding is to be predominately focused on getting Starlink up and running as a serious venture capable of mass-producing satellites. According to a recent Reuters analysis of the Starlink program, CEO Elon Musk challenged the company to begin dedicated launches of operational Starlink satellites as early as June 2019, and the company also plans to launch another round of improved (Gen 2) satellite prototypes early next year.
For prompt updates, on-the-ground perspectives, and unique glimpses of SpaceX’s rocket recovery fleet check out our brand new LaunchPad and LandingZone newsletters!
News
Tesla tinkering with Speed Profiles on FSD v14.2.1 has gone too far
Tesla recently released Full Self-Driving (FSD) v14.2.1, its latest version, but the tinkering with Speed Profiles has perhaps gone too far.
We try to keep it as real as possible with Full Self-Driving operation, and we are well aware that with the new versions, some things get better, but others get worse. It is all part of the process with FSD, and refinements are usually available within a week or so.
However, the latest v14.2.1 update has brought out some major complaints with Speed Profiles, at least on my end. It seems the adjustments have gone a tad too far, and there is a sizeable gap between Profiles that are next to one another.
Tesla FSD v14.2.1 first impressions:
✅ Smooth, stress-free highway operation
✅ Speed Profiles are refined — Hurry seems to be limited to 10 MPH over on highways. Switching from Mad Max to Hurry results in an abrupt braking pattern. Nothing of concern but do feel as if Speed…— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) November 29, 2025
The gap is so large that changing between them presents a bit of an unwelcome and drastic reduction in speed, which is perhaps a tad too fast for my liking. Additionally, Speed Profiles seem to have a set Speed Limit offset, which makes it less functional in live traffic situations.
Before I go any further, I’d like to remind everyone reading this that what I am about to write is purely my opinion; it is not right or wrong, or how everyone might feel. I am well aware that driving behaviors are widely subjective; what is acceptable to one might be unacceptable to another.
Speed Profiles are ‘Set’ to a Speed
From what I’ve experienced on v14.2.1, Tesla has chosen to go with somewhat of a preset max speed for each Speed Profile. With ‘Hurry,’ it appears to be 10 MPH over the speed limit, and it will not go even a single MPH faster than that. In a 55 MPH zone, it will only travel 65 MPH. Meanwhile, ‘Standard’ seems to be fixed at between 4-5 MPH over.
This is sort of a tough thing to have fixed, in my opinion. The speed at which the car travels should not be fixed; it should be more dependent on how traffic around it is traveling.
It almost seems as if the Speed Profile chosen should be more of a Behavior Profile. Standard should perform passes only to traffic that is slower than the traffic. If traffic is traveling at 75 MPH in a 65 MPH zone, the car should travel at 75 MPH. It should pass traffic that travels slower than this.
Hurry should be more willing to overtake cars, travel more than 10 MPH over the limit, and act as if someone is in a hurry to get somewhere, hence the name. Setting strict limits on how fast it will travel seems to be a real damper on its capabilities. It did much better in previous versions.
Some Speed Profiles are Too Distant from Others
This is specifically about Hurry and Mad Max, which are neighbors in the Speed Profiles menu. Hurry will only go 10 MPH over the limit, but Mad Max will travel similarly to traffic around it. I’ve seen some people say Mad Max is too slow, but I have not had that opinion when using it.
In a 55 MPH zone during Black Friday and Small Business Saturday, it is not unusual for traffic around me to travel in the low to mid-80s. Mad Max was very suitable for some traffic situations yesterday, especially as cars were traveling very fast. However, sometimes it required me to “gear down” into Hurry, especially as, at times, it would try to pass slower traffic in the right lane, a move I’m not super fond of.
We had some readers also mention this to us:
The abrupt speed reduction when switching to a slower speed profile is definitely an issue that should be improved upon.
— David Klem (@daklem) November 29, 2025
After switching from Mad Max to Hurry, there is a very abrupt drop in speed. It is not violent by any means, but it does shift your body forward, and it seems as if it is a tad drastic and could be refined further.
News
Tesla’s most affordable car is coming to the Netherlands
The trim is expected to launch at €36,990, making it the most affordable Model 3 the Dutch market has seen in years.
Tesla is preparing to introduce the Model 3 Standard to the Netherlands this December, as per information obtained by AutoWeek. The trim is expected to launch at €36,990, making it the most affordable Model 3 the Dutch market has seen in years.
While Tesla has not formally confirmed the vehicle’s arrival, pricing reportedly comes from a reliable source, the publication noted.
Model 3 Standard lands in NL
The U.S. version of the Model 3 Standard provides a clear preview of what Dutch buyers can expect, such as a no-frills configuration that maintains the recognizable Model 3 look without stripping the car down to a bare interior. The panoramic glass roof is still there, the exterior design is unchanged, and Tesla’s central touchscreen-driven cabin layout stays intact.
Cost reductions come from targeted equipment cuts. The American variant uses fewer speakers, lacks ventilated front seats and heated rear seats, and swaps premium materials for cloth and textile-heavy surfaces. Performance is modest compared with the Premium models, with a 0–100 km/h sprint of about six seconds and an estimated WLTP range near 550 kilometers.
Despite the smaller battery and simpler suspension, the Standard maintains the long-distance capability drivers have come to expect in a Tesla.
Pricing strategy aligns with Dutch EV demand and taxation shifts
At €36,990, the Model 3 Standard fits neatly into Tesla’s ongoing lineup reshuffle. The current Model 3 RWD has crept toward €42,000, creating space for a more competitive entry-level option, and positioning the new Model 3 Standard comfortably below the €39,990 Model Y Standard.
The timing aligns with rising Dutch demand for affordable EVs as subsidies like SEPP fade and tax advantages for electric cars continue to wind down, EVUpdate noted. Buyers seeking a no-frills EV with solid range are then likely to see the new trim as a compelling alternative.
With the U.S. variant long established and the Model Y Standard already available in the Netherlands, the appearance of an entry-level Model 3 in the Dutch configurator seems like a logical next step.
News
Tesla Model Y is still China’s best-selling premium EV through October
The premium-priced SUV outpaced rivals despite a competitive field, while the Model 3 also secured an impressive position.
The Tesla Model Y led China’s top-selling pure electric vehicles in the 200,000–300,000 RMB segment through October 2025, as per Yiche data compiled from China Passenger Car Association (CPCA) figures.
The premium-priced SUV outpaced rivals despite a competitive field, while the Model 3 also secured an impressive position.
The Model Y is still unrivaled
The Model Y’s dominance shines in Yiche’s October report, topping the chart for vehicles priced between 200,000 and 300,000 RMB. With 312,331 units retailed from January through October, the all-electric crossover was China’s best-selling EV in the 200,000–300,000 RMB segment.
The Xiaomi SU7 is a strong challenger at No. 2 with 234,521 units, followed by the Tesla Model 3, which achieved 146,379 retail sales through October. The Model Y’s potentially biggest rival, the Xiaomi YU7, is currently at No. 4 with 80,855 retail units sold.


Efficiency kings
The Model 3 and Model Y recently claimed the top two spots in Autohome’s latest real-world energy-consumption test, outperforming a broad field of Chinese-market EVs under identical 120 km/h cruising conditions with 375 kg payload and fixed 24 °C cabin temperature. The Model 3 achieved 20.8 kWh/100 km while the Model Y recorded 21.8 kWh/100 km, reaffirming Tesla’s efficiency lead.
The results drew immediate attention from Xiaomi CEO Lei Jun, who publicly recognized Tesla’s advantage while pledging continued refinement for his brand’s lineup.
“The Xiaomi SU7’s energy consumption performance is also very good; you can take a closer look. The fact that its test results are weaker than Tesla’s is partly due to objective reasons: the Xiaomi SU7 is a C-segment car, larger and with higher specifications, making it heavier and naturally increasing energy consumption. Of course, we will continue to learn from Tesla and further optimize its energy consumption performance!” Lei Jun wrote in a post on Weibo.



