News
SpaceX customer reaffirms third Falcon Heavy mission’s Q2 2019 launch target
Taiwan’s National Space Organization (NSO) has reaffirmed a Q2 2019 launch target for SpaceX’s third-ever Falcon Heavy mission, a US Air Force-sponsored test launch opportunity known as Space Test Program 2 (STP-2).
Set to host approximately two dozen customer spacecraft, one of the largest and most monetarily significant copassengers riding on STP-2 is Formosat-7, a six-satellite Earth sensing constellation built with the cooperation of Taiwan’s NSO and the United States’ NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) for around $105M. If successfully launched, Formosat-7 will dramatically expand Taiwan’s domestic Earth observation and weather forecasting capabilities, important for a nation at high risk of typhoons and flooding rains.
Formosat-7, the latest generation of the series, is jointly developed by #Taiwan’s National Space Organization and the #US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration following an agreement signed in 2010. https://t.co/7hj2ijFutZ
— Asia Times (@asiatimesonline) January 7, 2019
Although Taiwan officials were unable to offer a target more specific than Q2 2019 (April to June), it’s understood by way of NASA comments and sources inside SpaceX that STP-2’s tentative launch target currently stands in April. For a number of reasons, chances are high that that ambitious launch target will slip into May or June. Notably, the simple fact that Falcon Heavy’s next two launches (Arabsat 6A and STP-2) are scheduled within just a few months of each other almost singlehandedly wipes out any possibility that both Heavy launches will feature all-new side and center boosters, strongly implying that whichever mission flies second will be launching on three flight-proven boosters.
To further ramp up the difficulty (and improbability), those three flight-proven Block 5 boosters would have to launch as an integrated Falcon Heavy, safely land (two by landing zone, one by drone ship), be transported to SpaceX facilities, and finally be refurbished and reintegrated for their second launch in no more than 30 to 120 days from start to finish. SpaceX’s record for Falcon 9 booster turnaround (the time between two launches) currently stands at 72 days for Block 4 hardware and 74 days for Block 5, meaning that the company could effectively need to simultaneously break its booster turnaround record three times in order to preserve a number of possible launch dates for both missions.
Look who was waving at passing planes over McGregor today!
A Falcon Heavy side booster on the McGregor test stand for a static fire test. pic.twitter.com/S7af6b0gHk
— NSF – NASASpaceflight.com (@NASASpaceflight) November 18, 2018
If it turns out the USAF is actually unwilling to fly its first Falcon Heavy mission on all flight-proven boosters (a strong possibility) or that that has never been the plan, STP-2’s claimed Q2 2019 target would likely have to slip several months into 2019. This would afford SpaceX more time and resources to build an extra three new Falcon Heavy boosters (two sides, one center), each of which requires a bare minimum of several weeks of dedicated production time and months of lead time (at least for the center core), all while preventing or significantly slowing the completed production of other new Falcon boosters.
The exact state of SpaceX’s Falcon 9 and Heavy production is currently unknown, with indications that the company might be building or have already finished core number B1055 or higher, but it’s safe to say that there is not exactly a lot of slack in the production lines in the first half of 2019. Most important, SpaceX likely needs to begin production of the human-rated Falcon 9 boosters that will ultimately launch the company’s first two crewed Crew Dragons as early as June and August, respectively.
-
- Falcon Heavy is seen here lifting off during its spectacular launch debut. (SpaceX)
-
- LZ-1 and LZ-2, circa February 2018. (SpaceX)
-
- A Falcon Heavy side booster was spotted eastbound in Arizona on November 10th. (Reddit – beast-sam)
-
- The second Falcon Heavy booster in four weeks was spotted Eastbound in Arizona by SpaceX Facebook group member Eric Schmidt on Dec. 3. (Eric Schmidt – Facebook)
-
- The second (and third) flight of Falcon Heavy is even closer to reality as a new side booster heads to Florida after finishing static fire tests in Texas. (Reddit /u/e32revelry)
-
- The next Falcon Heavy’s first side booster delivery was caught by several onlookers around December 21. (Instagram)
If the first Falcon 9 set to launch an uncrewed Crew Dragon (B1051) is anything to go off of, each human-rated Falcon 9 is put through an exceptionally time-consuming and strenuous range of tests to satisfy NASA’s requirements, requiring a considerable amount of extra resources (infrastructure, staff, time) to be produced and readied for launch. B1051 likely spent 3+ months in McGregor, Texas performing checks and one or several static fire tests, whereas a more normal Falcon booster typically spends no more than 3-6 weeks at SpaceX’s test facilities before shipping to its launch pad.
Ultimately, time will tell which hurdles the company’s executives (and hopefully engineers) have selected for its next two Falcon Heavy launches: an extraordinary feat of Falcon reusability or a Tesla-reminiscent period of Falcon production hell?
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!
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
Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.
The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.
The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”
Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Napoli said:
“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.
As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.
We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.
My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.
I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”
🚨 Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli calls rumors of financial issues “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Read his full remarks here: https://t.co/t3Pg1NHvzy pic.twitter.com/LvHUPhO4Qf
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 15, 2026
It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.
Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.
Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.
Tesla has once again demonstrated strong customer focus by swiftly addressing and fully refunding a bizarre Supercharger pricing glitch that affected drivers in Atlantic Canada.
The issue surfaced earlier this month when the Tesla app began displaying dramatically inflated per-minute charging rates at stations in Prince Edward Island and parts of New Brunswick.
One widely shared screenshot from a Charlottetown, PEI Supercharger showed rates reaching ridiculous levels: $6.00 per minute for the 180-250 kW tier, along with $3.57/min for 100-180 kW and $2.29/min for 60-100 kW.
Correct pricing will be going live at midnight tonight. All fees since July 2nd 2026 will be waived.
— Tesla Charging (@TeslaCharging) July 13, 2026
These figures were several times higher than normal Supercharger pricing in the region.
To put the error in perspective, charging at the highest incorrect rate would have been shockingly expensive.
At 250 kW, a common charging speed at Superchargers, a vehicle pulls roughly 4.17 kWh per minute. Under the glitch, a driver spending just 10 minutes at peak power would face a $60 bill. A typical 20- to 30-minute session to add meaningful range could have cost $120 to $180 or more, before any congestion fees.
Tesla gets another layer of gamification with Free Supercharging on the line
By comparison, standard Canadian Supercharger rates usually fall between $0.25 and $0.60 per kWh, making a similar session cost roughly $15–$40. The erroneous per-minute structure, combined with the inflated numbers, turned what should be a convenient stop into a potential financial shock.
The glitch appears to have started sometime around early July, and quickly drew attention on social media as owners questioned whether Tesla had implemented steep hidden increases. Some drivers even reported seeing $0 charges in their history, indicating broader billing confusion.
Tesla’s official Charging account on X stated that correct pricing would roll out at midnight on July 13, so the fix is already in effect. More importantly, the company announced it would waive all fees for every Supercharger session since July 2. This blanket waiver covers the entire affected period without requiring users to file individual claims, with automated refunds expected soon. The decision affects stations in PEI and nearby areas in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.
It’s a classy move, and rather than issuing partial credits or forcing owners to submit support tickets, Tesla simply absorbed the cost of the system error and made drivers whole. In an industry where hidden fees and bill disputes are common, Tesla’s proactive, no-questions-asked approach reinforces owner trust and highlights the company’s commitment to service excellence.
The incident, while disruptive for a short time, ultimately showcases Tesla’s ability to own mistakes and prioritize customer satisfaction. Atlantic Canada Tesla owners can now charge with confidence again, knowing the company has their back when technology glitches occur.
In an era of complex EV billing, such transparency and generosity are refreshing and set a positive example for the industry.
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
Elon Musk’s Texas ranch to showcase the lifelong work that changed the world
