News
SpaceX targeting 52 Falcon 9, Falcon Heavy launches in 2022
Shortly before SpaceX was scheduled to launch an Italian Earth observation satellite, a member of NASA’s Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel (ASAP) revealed that the company aims to conduct as many as 52 launches this year.
Supporting several estimates published by Teslarati over the last month, SpaceX officially targeting up to one launch per week in 2022 meshes well with the company’s record-breaking commercial launch manifest and plans for up to 10 Falcon launches in December 2021 and January 2022 alone. It also comes as no surprise after SpaceX’s spectacular performance in the first six months of 2021.
In H1 2021, before major production issues effectively halted all Starlink launches, SpaceX launches 20 Falcon 9 rockets in six months, demonstrating a sustainable cadence of 40 launches per year. Of those 20 launches, 13 were Starlink missions and 7 were commercial. Due to a lack of commercial launches and a lack of Starlink satellites to launch, SpaceX then proceeded to launch just three times between July 1st and November 11th.
However, in the last two months of 2021, SpaceX managed to go from launching three times in 19 weeks to launching eight Falcon 9 rockets in six weeks. Further, SpaceX completed five of those eight launches in less than three weeks. Given that that feat made December 2021 SpaceX’s first five-launch month ever just a year after SpaceX’s first four-launch month ever, it wasn’t unreasonable to assume that five launches in one month was a fluke. However, the fact that SpaceX abruptly went from a record of five launches in ~27 days to five launches in ~19 days did feel like more than a mere coincidence
That was confirmed about two weeks later, when a US military official responsible for managing the Florida range implicitly revealed that SpaceX was targeting up to five East Coast Falcon launches in January 2022. It then became a question of whether SpaceX’s plans would survive the only true constant of spaceflight: delays.
However, three weeks later, SpaceX has successfully launched three Falcon 9 rockets and is on track to launch another two from Florida in the last few days of the month. Originally scheduled to launch in late 2021, the Italian Space Agency’s (ASI) CSG-2 Earth observation radar satellite was eventually rescheduled for January 27th, but poor weather forced SpaceX to delay that launch to 6:11 pm EST (23:11 UTC), Friday, January 28th, 29th, and finally the 30th. Perhaps less than a day later, as early as 2:17 pm (19:17 UTC) on Monday, January 31st (delayed from Jan 29th and 30th), another Falcon 9 rocket is scheduled to launch a batch of approximately 49 Starlink satellites known as Starlink 4-7.
Last but not least, SpaceX has already tested and static-fired a third Falcon 9 rocket and is prepared to launch the National Reconnaissance Office’s (NRO) NROL-87 spy satellite(s) out of California’s Vandenberg Space Force Base (VSFB) no earlier than (NET) 11:07 am PST (19:07 UTC), Wednesday, February 2nd. If all three of those launches happen according to plan, SpaceX will have kicked off 2022 with six launches in the first five weeks of the year and, technically, just 27 days. Further, over a period of 10 weeks, SpaceX will have potentially completed twelve Falcon 9 launches.
In short, while just one month into the year, SpaceX is undeniably maintaining the launch cadence it will need to launch an average of one Falcon rocket per week for all of 2022. It’s obviously far more likely that unexpected issues will arise, significantly delaying a number of launches and pushing SpaceX below its goal of 52 launches in one year, but even 40 launches per year would be an extraordinary achievement. If SpaceX actually does achieve 50+ launches in 2022, Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy will represent the second rocket family in history to achieve such a cadence – and the first to do so since the 1980s.
Tune in below around 6pm EST on Friday, January 28th to watch SpaceX’s fourth Falcon launch of the year.
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
