News
SpaceX sets new Falcon 9 Block 5 reusability milestones for second half of 2019
Speaking at 2019’s Asia-Pacific Satellite (APSAT) Conference, SpaceX Vice President of Commercial Sales Jonathan Hofeller – squeezed into a sea of breaking-news updates – announced that the company plans to launch the same Falcon 9 Block 5 booster for the fifth (or sixth) time by the end of 2019.
Just an add-on at the end of a number of updates focused on SpaceX’s next-generation Starship/Super Heavy rocket, the phrasing reported by SpaceNews.com technically means that there are plans for a Falcon 9 booster to launch for the sixth time in the second half of 2019. The demonstration of such an extreme level of operational reusability barely 18 months after Falcon 9 Block 5’s debut would make it clear that SpaceX’s latest Falcon upgrade has been a resounding success. In line with those positive signs, Hofeller also noted that SpaceX is already starting to transfer the fruits of those labors to its customers by permanently lowering the base price of Falcon 9 launch contracts.
Block 5 off to a spectacular start
First reported on by SpaceNews’ Caleb Henry, one of a few spaceflight journalists able to attend 2019’s Jakarta, Indonesia-based APSAT conference, details about the near-term future of Falcon 9 Block 5 reusability milestones were effectively tacked on at the end of much higher-profile breaking-news tidbits. Although wildly ambitious Starship goals led headlines (stay tuned for Teslarati’s own analysis later this week), the fact remains that ambitious development goals are inherently tenuous and likely to slip, particularly when the subject is large-scale, fully-reusable launch vehicles developed from a nearly blank slate.
What is not up for debate, however, is the fact that SpaceX’s Falcon 9 Block 5 upgrade is already flying routinely and reliably. After a successful debut in May 2018, Block 5 took over all SpaceX launches less than two months later. Since then, a total of 12 freshly-built Block 5 boosters have supported 16 Falcon 9 and 2 Falcon Heavy launches, ten – more than half – of which involved flight-proven boosters. According to official statements made recently by SpaceX executives, Block 5 boosters are expected to support an additional 12-19* launches in the second half of 2019.
*Derived by stacking “2-6 dedicated Starlink launches” and SpaceX’s 2019 target of 18-21 non–Starlink launches
Tied directly to claims that the same Falcon 9 Block 5 booster will launch for the fifth or sixth time by the end of 2019, SpaceX already has three Falcon 9 boosters that have each completed a trio of launches, as well as an additional five with either one or two launches under their belts. Pictured at the top of the article, all three thrice-flown Falcon 9 boosters – B1046, B1048, and B1049 – could arguably be selected to become the next pathfinder as SpaceX prepares to put boosters through their fourth launches and beyond.
Rumored to be assigned to Crew Dragon’s in-flight abort (IFA) test prior to a major capsule anomaly on April 20th, B1046 could be off the manifest if SpaceX is confident that said IFA test can still be performed within the next several months. It’s currently unclear if that is a viable option for SpaceX’s Crew Dragon schedule, likely to remain uncertain until the failure investigation is fully completed and any necessary design/hardware/software fixes have been implemented. B1046 completed its third launch in December 2018 (a full six months ago), followed by B1048 in February 2019 and B1049 in May 2019. Although the “unknown territory” aspect of Block 5 reuse milestones is becoming less noteworthy, SpaceX is still likely to treat B104X’s fourth launch as a pathfinder, requiring extra time to dot I’s and cross T’s. With B1046 and B1048 potentially ready to go, that milestone could come any time now.
SpaceX customers already reaping financial benefits
Meanwhile, although certain heads-in-sand competitors continue to act and claim otherwise, SpaceX has reportedly normalized earlier prices for customers flying on flight-proven milestone missions. Speaking at APSAT, SpaceX’s Jonathan Hofeller indicated that that pricing is now the company’s “normal pricing”, pushing Falcon 9’s base price as low as ~$50M according to comments CEO Elon Musk made about a year ago. Two years prior to those comments and about six months prior to SpaceX’s first-ever booster reuse, COO and President Gwynne Shotwell reported that the company was offering discounts of ~10% for customers willing to contract launches on flight-proven Falcon 9 boosters.
In other words, SpaceX has cut Falcon 9’s base launch costs by anywhere from 10-20% over the last three years, a period in which the Falcon 9 V1.2 Full Thrust rocket’s capabilities were also dramatically upgraded from Block 1 (debut: December 2015) through Block 5 (debut: May 2018). Speaking during a press conference focused on Falcon 9 Block 5’s launch debut, CEO Elon Musk estimated that SpaceX has spent more than $1 billion to develop Falcon 9 reusability, while he previously estimated Falcon Heavy’s development costs to be well north of ~$500M. Musk and other execs have previously confirmed that SpaceX means to recoup some or all of that investment, indicating that the current margins of Falcon 9 launch contracts must be extremely favorable.
SpaceX has a healthy commercial manifest and will need to support dozens to hundreds of its own dedicated Starlink launches in order to orbit an operational and profitable constellation.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
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.
Tesla tinkering with Speed Profiles on FSD v14.2.1 has gone too far
Tesla’s most affordable car is coming to the Netherlands
