News
SpaceX Falcon 9 wins Korean launch contract as 2019 mystery missions persist
SpaceX has silently announced that Falcon 9 won a contract for a South Korean military communications satellite, currently scheduled to launch from the company’s Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS) LC-40 pad no earlier than November 2019.
Subcontracted from Lockheed Martin to Airbus Defense and Space in 2016, the satellite – known as Anasis II (formerly KMilSatCom 1) – is based on a common bus built by Airbus and could weigh anywhere from 3500 to 6000 kilograms (7500-13,200 lb). Falcon 9 will be tasked with launching Anasis II to geostationary transfer orbit (GTO), after which the satellite will use its own onboard propulsion to circularize the orbit and begin operations. Although the Korean contract brings SpaceX one step closer to its goal of 18-21 launches (excluding Starlink) in 2019, it also raises the question: what mystery missions are missing from public launch manifests?
Manifest Mystery
As previously discussed in both Teslarati articles and newsletters, comments from SpaceX executives in February and May 2019 reiterate the company’s expectation of 18-21 launches in 2019, excluding Starlink. Hofeller’s “more than 21 launches” admittedly came more than two months before a catastrophic Crew Dragon failure threw the spacecraft’s launch manifest into limbo.
Three months later, SpaceX President and COO Gwynne Shotwell reiterated the idea that SpaceX could beat its 2018 launch record (21 launches) or at least get close. Curiously, she specifically noted that SpaceX’s purported 18-21 launch manifest excluded Starlink missions, of which SpaceX has already launched one. In short, SpaceX has completed 7 launches in 2019 (6 if Starlink v0.9 is excluded). The company’s public manifest – unofficially cobbled together by fans – shows 9 more launches scheduled for a total of 15 non-Starlink launches in 2019.
To meet Shotwell’s expected 18-21 non-Starlink launches, anywhere from 3 to 6 missions are apparently missing from publicly-managed launch manifests. It’s unclear if SpaceX actually has enough launch-ready customers to achieve those ambitious targets. Additionally, SpaceX is currently on track to complete 8 launches total (1 Starlink) in the first half of 2019. In 2017 and 2018 (two years without interruption), SpaceX consistently launched an equivalent number (or more) missions in the first half of the year when compared to the second half, and both years have maxed out at 9 launches in H2.
SpaceX will have to beat that H2 record to reach 18 launches in 2019 even if Starlink missions are counted. Meanwhile, SpaceX says that as many as 1-5 additional Starlink launches are scheduled for 2019, bringing the total number of missions as high as 20-27 in differing best-case scenarios. Practically speaking, between SpaceX’s Pad 39A and LC-40 launch facilities, the company could easily maintain a biweekly or even weekly cadence (13-26 launches in H2 2019). The real constraint, however, is hardware availability – i.e. whether SpaceX has the rocket pieces and flight-ready satellite(s) it needs to launch a given mission.
Can SpaceX do it?
This is an extremely hard question to answer, as all details that really matter are of the organizational, company-secrets sort that SpaceX just doesn’t publicize. From a technical and practical perspective, the answer is a reasonable confident “yes.” If Falcon Heavy Flight 3 (STP-2) is completed successfully, SpaceX will have an impressive fleet of at least 8 flight-proven Falcon 9-class boosters. Even assuming that no progress is made beyond the current Block 5 turnaround average of ~110 days (~3.5 months), SpaceX’s current fleet should be able to immediately support four launches and an additional 8-12 before the end of 2019.
The primary limit, then, would be SpaceX’s ability to produce Falcon 9 upper stages and fairings, as well as the stamina and quality of the company’s managers and employees. Even then, the question of SpaceX’s 3-6 mystery launches will remain unanswered until either the customer or launch provider choose to open up. For now, we wait…
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
Florida Governor Ron DeSantis has sharply criticized legacy media outlets for what he describes as selective and biased reporting on vehicle accidents involving Tesla. In a recent X post, DeSantis questioned why headlines routinely spotlight the Tesla brand in crash stories, even when human error is the clear cause, while similar incidents with other automakers often receive generic treatment.
A prime example is the June 19, 2026, fatal crash in Katy, Texas. A Tesla Model 3 driven by Michael Butler struck a brick home at high speed, killing 76-year-old Martha Avila inside. Initial reports and headlines prominently featured “Tesla crash” and referenced the driver’s claim that an automated driving-assistance system was engaged.
Many outlets quickly speculated that Full Self-Driving or Autopilot were the cause of the crash, immediately blaming the suites for the accident shortly after it happened.
However, Tesla responded shortly after the accident with vehicle data that showed Butler manually overrode the system by pressing the accelerator to 100 percent, reaching 73 MPH in a residential area, more than double the speed limit. The accelerator remained floored after impact.
Tesla finally clarifies fatal Texas crash, confirms driver manually overrode acceleration
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) later confirmed these findings, and Butler now faces manslaughter charges. His phone searches also included queries like “Tesla FSD too timid,” suggesting he may have intervened aggressively. Despite this, many headlines continued to center Tesla’s technology rather than the driver’s actions.
DeSantis highlighted a Washington Post headline, which was labeled, “Newly released photo shows wreckage of Tesla crash that killed grandmother.”
Do legacy media outlets typically use headlines involving the make of a car in a crash or is that only for Tesla?
It would be one thing if the self-driving malfunctioned but the crash was purely human-induced.
Seems like these outlets want to associate Tesla with crashes as… pic.twitter.com/EmfyeYiuv6
— Ron DeSantis (@RonDeSantis) July 17, 2026
The subheadline noted the driver overrode assistance and floored the accelerator, yet the brand name dominated the framing. He asked whether legacy outlets typically name the make of a car in routine crashes or reserve that treatment for Tesla to push a narrative.
This pattern appears widespread. Crashes involving Ford, Chevrolet, or Toyota vehicles frequently appear as “pickup truck slams into home” or “fatal car crash kills pedestrian” without brand specifics, especially absent new technology angles.
High-profile Ford F-150 or Chevy Silverado incidents tied to large sales volumes often escape brand-callout scrutiny. In contrast, Tesla stories consistently lead with the manufacturer, amplifying perceptions of risk despite data showing strong overall safety performance:
🚨 Why do Tesla Owners get so defensive over the narrative of crashes involving Teslas? https://t.co/aX7ogtjTCR pic.twitter.com/KO4QWaLOKl
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 24, 2026
Tesla’s own 2025 Impact Report indicates vehicles using FSD logged 0.19 major incidents per million miles, roughly eight times fewer than the U.S. average. Models like the Model Y also rank among the safest in IIHS and NHTSA testing for occupant protection. Critics argue disproportionate coverage ignores these statistics and driver behavior factors, such as younger or more aggressive Tesla owners in some studies.
DeSantis frames this as part of a broader political agenda against innovative American companies like Tesla. By consistently naming Tesla while downplaying others, media outlets risk eroding public trust and shaping perceptions detached from the evidence of human error in most cases.
As autonomous technology evolves across the industry, consistent and factual reporting will be essential to separate real safety concerns from narrative-driven coverage.
Tesla entered two new markets this week by advancing its presence in Latvia (Europe) and officially launching operations in Uruguay (South America), marking a rapid dual-continent expansion.
These moves underscore the company’s strategy to tap into emerging EV markets with supportive policies, renewable energy grids, and growing demand for sustainable transport.
Latvia: Strengthening the Baltic Footprint
In Latvia, Tesla has built on its earlier registration of Tesla Latvia SIA in late 2025 with recent steps toward full operations, including job postings for a service center and representation in Riga. This aligns with broader Baltic expansion following Lithuania’s model of pop-up stores and service centers.
Coming to Latvia https://t.co/XNkQQJ2O6a pic.twitter.com/yS9kpcNky1
— Tesla Europe, Middle East & Africa (@teslaeurope) July 17, 2026
EV penetration in Latvia stands at around 7 percent for BEVs in new passenger car registrations. 2025 data showed 1,602 BEVs out of about 22,500 total, or 7.1 percent, with combined plug-ins nearing 19 percent. Growth has been steady but below the European average, supported by government subsidies and infrastructure development. Tesla models like the Model 3 lead local EV registrations.
Vehicles for the Latvian market will likely be sourced from Gigafactory Berlin or Gigafactory Shanghai. Charging infrastructure is robust for the region as well, with over 400- 2,000 public points, with Tesla Superchargers in Riga, Jūrmala, and along Via Baltica routes offering up to 250 kW.
Uruguay: Third South American Country
Tesla teased its Uruguay arrival with “Estamos llegando,” or, “We are arriving,” on social media, followed by an official presentation scheduled for mid-July.
Hola Uruguay 🇺🇾
Nuestros Model 3 y Model Y están cada vez mas cerca! pic.twitter.com/FR41fsA7um
— Tesla Latinoamérica (@Tesla_LatAm) June 30, 2026
The company established Tesla Uruguay SAS, homologated Model 3 and Model Y (three versions each), and appointed local leadership. This makes Uruguay Tesla’s third official South American market after Chile and Colombia.
Uruguay boasts one of Latin America’s highest EV penetrations, with battery-electric vehicles exceeding 20 percent market share recently, driven by tax incentives, high fuel prices, and a nearly 95-100 percent renewable electricity grid. Hundreds of Teslas already operate via grey imports, but official sales bring warranties, service, and support.
Vehicles will be imported from Gigafactory Shanghai, enabling competitive pricing for Model 3 and Model Y. Charging plans include Supercharger development alongside existing infrastructure, leveraging the country’s green energy advantage for affordable operation.
Tesla Superchargers follow Model 3 and Model Y to South American country
Tesla’s Dual Continent Expansion
Tesla’s simultaneous push into Latvia and Uruguay demonstrates efficient scaling: prioritizing service and infrastructure first, then direct sales in high-potential niches. In Europe, it fills Baltic gaps; in Latin America, it counters Chinese dominance while leveraging renewables.
This dual move signals Tesla’s ambition to accelerate global EV adoption amid varying regional paces. By addressing local needs, like subsidies in Latvia or incentives and green grids in Uruguay, Tesla not only boosts volumes but advances its mission of sustainable energy.
For investors and consumers, it highlights resilience and opportunity in diverse markets, potentially paving the way for further growth in underserved regions. With strong fundamentals in both, these entries could yield long-term gains as EV transitions mature worldwide.
SpaceX has announced a new target date for the thirteenth test flight of Starship: Monday, July 20, with the launch window opening at 6:45 p.m ET/5:45 p.m. CT.
This is the first rescheduling attempt of Starship’s 13th test flight. It was set to launch last night, but SpaceX scrubbed the launch attempt.
🚨 SpaceX is now looking at Monday, July 20th at 6:45 p.m ET/5:45 p.m. CT for the 13th test flight of Starship pic.twitter.com/7s8aMJV5Ge
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 17, 2026
CEO Elon Musk revealed that some of the engines on Starship did not start, which automatically triggers a launch abort. Two of the Raptor engines will be removed and replaced.
To be confident of a good flight, 2 Raptors will be removed & replaced. Most probable launch timing is early next week.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 17, 2026
SpaceX officially announced the new launch window this morning.
Starship’s 13th test launch comes with a few new objectives, but SpaceX does not plan to attempt a catch of the booster, which it has done several times in the past.
For Starship’s Upper Stage, there are some adjustments to ensure engine reusability that will be assessed during the ascent, and 20 operational Starlink V3 satellites are also set to make their way into space. SpaceX also plans to attempt an in-space relight of a single Raptor engine, which is a critical demonstration for future orbital deorbit, refueling, and deep space maneuvers.
Ultimately, it will splash down in the Indian Ocean.
The continuous tests help SpaceX advance the Starship program toward eventual full reusability, operational Starlink V3 deployment, and future missions, which include NASA’s Artemis program.
Ron DeSantis calls out media bias in Tesla crash coverage
Tesla enters two new markets on two different continents in one week
