News
SpaceX targeting 100 launches in 2023
CEO Elon Musk says that SpaceX is aiming to complete up to 100 launches in 2023 while the company continues to set records in 2022.
In the history of orbital spaceflight, no family of rockets – let alone a single variant like Falcon 9 – has completed more than 61 successful launches in one calendar year. The cadence target Musk is suggesting is unprecedented and would be an extraordinary challenge even for SpaceX, a company that just completed its 50th successful Falcon 9 launch in a little over 12 months. However, it’s less impossible than it sounds.
After a few years of stagnation at a cadence of roughly 15-20 launches per year from 2017 through 2019, and an impressive doubling from 2019 to 2020 as Starlink entered its buildout phase, SpaceX effectively flipped a switch in 2021. 2020 appears to have been a sort of trial run, demonstrating that SpaceX was able to launch one Falcon 9 rocket every two weeks. At 26 launches for the year, it broke SpaceX’s previous record – 21 launches, set in 2018 – by almost 25%. But something changed in 2021.
In the first half of the year, SpaceX launched 20 times, demonstrating an unexpected 50% improvement over 2020’s annual cadence. In the second half of the year, SpaceX had two strange gaps of almost two months each, during which it didn’t once. In the other two months, though, SpaceX launched 11 times, effectively demonstrating another launch cadence improvement of more than 50% over the first half of the year. Finally, SpaceX completed 6 of those 11 launches in a period of 4 weeks near the end of the year – an annual cadence of 78 launches if sustained for a full year.
Thus far, 2022 has been an eight-month extension of the last few weeks of 2021. SpaceX even appears to have improved upon itself again, accelerating its launch cadence throughout the year. In the first half of the year, SpaceX managed 27 Falcon 9 launches, nearly beating the 31-launch record it set in 2021 in half the time and demonstrating an annual cadence of up to 54 launches per year if sustained.
Instead of continuing that already impressive pace in the second half of the year, SpaceX launched six times in July and another six times in August, sustaining an annualized cadence of 72 launches per year for two full months. At the moment, that could be considered a fluke. But if SpaceX manages another six launches in September, which is the plan, it can likely be deemed a new normal for Falcon 9 launch cadence.
From 60 to 100
To achieve 100 Falcon launches in 2023, SpaceX would need to find a way to launch an average of eight times per month, an improvement of 33% over the six-launch months the company appears to be increasingly comfortable with. Likely thanks to intentional planning and overengineering done years in advance of the payoff, SpaceX’s fleet of Falcon launch pads and recovery ships – drone ship landing platforms especially – appear to be capable of achieving that lofty cadence goal.
Assuming all three pads were able to consistently operate at their fastest demonstrated turnaround times with little to no downtime, they could theoretically support around 115 launches per year. SpaceX drone ship availability is another concern, but the current fleet of three ships can theoretically support 100 Falcon 9 landings in one year if each ship is able to recover one booster every 11 days. Of course, achieving such tight margins would require extremely inflexible scheduling and leave almost no margin for error – perhaps just a day or less per launch, on average.
Without significant upgrades, either feat would be extremely impressive on its own. Stacking those challenges, launching 100 times in 2023 would require an extraordinary effort and a good amount of luck. But it’s far from impossible. Gven the abrupt and impressive progress SpaceX has made and continues to make in 2021 and 2022, it’s also a reasonable goal: far from easy but well within reach with some moderate improvements.
Finally, Musk’s calculus may include a number of launches of SpaceX’s next-generation Starship rocket, which would make the task even more achievable for Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy. Time will tell, and SpaceX’s activity in the last four months of 2022 will make it clear whether 2023’s 100-launch target is truly feasible.
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
