News
SpaceX’s backup Dragon launch pad on track for 2023 debut
SpaceX has begun building a backup launch pad for its Cargo and Crew Dragon spacecraft and says the facility could be ready for use as early as fall 2023.
Reuters first revealed those plans in June 2022. They arose because NASA reportedly told SpaceX it was worried that the company’s first Florida Starship launch site – colocated at the only pad currently able to launch SpaceX Dragon spacecraft – could add too much risk. In September 2022, NASA and SpaceX acknowledged plans to modify LC-40 for Dragon launches and indicated that both parties had decided to proceed.
Four months later, SpaceX and NASA have provided another press conference update. Officials confirmed that construction is already partially underway and reported that LC-40 could be ready to support its first Dragon launch less than a year from now.
The update that's rolling out to the fleet makes full use of the front and rear steering travel to minimize turning circle. In this case a reduction of 1.6 feet just over the air— Wes (@wmorrill3) April 16, 2024
Because Boeing’s comparable Starliner capsule is years behind schedule and still unqualified to launch humans, NASA has relied almost exclusively on SpaceX’s Crew Dragon to launch its astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS) since 2020. Starliner should be ready to supplement Crew Dragon’s operational astronaut launches by the end of 2023 or early 2024, alleviating some of that pressure.
NASA, however, chose to develop two spacecraft to guarantee that one spacecraft would likely be available if the other was grounded for any reason. Adding the possibility that a giant, new, experimental rocket (Starship) could potentially halt all SpaceX Dragon launches in one fell swoop was apparently one bridge too many for the agency.
SpaceX’s answer to the problem was about as simple, elegant, and cheap as possible. The company has two operational Falcon launch pads in Florida, and it proposed to modify the second pad. SpaceX’s Cape Canaveral Space Force Station (CCSFS) LC-40 pad is located on a secure military base and has an even longer history of successful Falcon 9 launches than Pad 39A. It also appears that its layout will allow SpaceX to add a Dragon access tower without requiring major redesigns or months of downtime.
LC-40 is SpaceX’s most productive launch pad by far, and the company intends to launch up to 100 times in 2023. It’s thus crucial that the pad remains as active as possible as it’s modified – a major challenge. A combination of luck and the fact that the launch pad is already operational is the only reason that’s possible.
Modifying SpaceX’s busiest pad
In theory, SpaceX needs to do relatively little to enable Dragon launches out of LC-40. Dragon spacecraft are processed for flight at a separate facility and only head to the pad once they’re ready to be attached to a Falcon 9 rocket. The biggest modification LC-40 needs is a launch tower, but SpaceX ironically has experience building giant towers in sections – and offsite – through Starship.
LC-40’s Dragon access tower requires far less complex plumbing and should be smaller and easier to prefabricate and assemble. Regulatory documents indicate that the new tower will stand 81 meters (265 feet) tall – almost a third shorter than the 110-meter-tall tower SpaceX modified at Pad 39A for the same purpose. LC-40 will also need a swinging access arm to connect the tower to Dragon’s hatch. That arm can also be constructed offsite, further reducing the amount of downtime required.
The most disruptive modifications may involve LC-40’s transporter/erector (T/E) device, which rolls Falcon 9 out to the pad, raises it vertical, holds it down with giant clamps; and hosts a maze of plumbing that fuels, pressurizes, and powers the rocket. The top of LC-40’s T/E is fitted with a brace designed to support Falcon payload fairings. In comparison, 39A’s T/E was designed with swappable ‘heads’ that allow SpaceX to switch between Dragon and fairing configurations in a matter of days. The top of LC-40’s T/E also appears to be somewhat removable, but SpaceX may still have to halt launches for a few weeks to get the T/E up to spec and modified for Dragon.
SpaceX says that LC-40 will be ready to support its first Dragon launch as early as fall (Q4) 2023. Its first Dragon mission will carry cargo to the ISS, meaning that the tower, arm, and pad will not need to be immediately human-rated. In theory, SpaceX could even launch Cargo Dragon 2 from LC-40 without a tower or arm, as the only purpose of the tower during uncrewed missions is to load volatile cargo at the last possible second. SpaceX could even revert to a practice that dates back to its original Dragon 1 spacecraft and devise a method to late-load cargo while Falcon 9 and Dragon are still horizontal.
The tower and access arm are only essential for Crew Dragon launches, during which astronauts must board the spacecraft a few hours before liftoff. More importantly, the same arm and tower would be used to escape Dragon and Falcon 9 in case of a minor emergency. NASA requires an escape (egress) system to human-rate a launch pad and rocket. SpaceX met that requirement at Pad 39A with a “slidewire basket” system that carries astronauts to a concrete bunker several hundred feet away from the rocket. Before LC-40 can be human-rated, SpaceX will likely need to build the same basket-and-bunker system or come up with a viable alternative.
Once complete, SpaceX will have two pads capable of supporting all Crew and Cargo Dragon launches. With that redundancy in place, NASA should be far more open to regular launches of SpaceX’s next-generation Starship rocket out of Pad 39A. Access to multiple pads will likely be essential for Starship to complete NASA’s Human Landing System (HLS) contracts, which will culminate in the giant rocket sending humans back to the Moon for the first (and second) time in half a century in the mid-to-late-2020s.
Elon Musk
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Four Raptor engines failed to ignite at T-zero, forcing SpaceX to scrub Starship Flight 13 Thursday.
SpaceX scrubbed the Starship Flight 13 launch attempt Thursday evening at the last possible moment, after four of the Super Heavy booster’s 33 Raptor 3 engines failed to ignite during the startup sequence. The 90-minute window had opened at 6:45 p.m. EDT from Starbase in Boca Chica, Texas, and the countdown had proceeded without issue all day, with more than 11.5 million pounds of liquid methane and liquid oxygen being fully loaded into the rocket before the automated abort triggered. SpaceX’s launch directors posted on X, “Standing down from today’s flight test attempt,” and shut down the livestream shortly after.
Musk confirmed the root cause within hours. “Some of the engines didn’t start, triggering an automatic launch abort,” he wrote on X. “To be confident of a good flight, 2 Raptors will be removed and replaced. Most probable launch timing is early next week.” SpaceX engineers began draining propellant tanks immediately and Booster 20 was rolled back to its hangar for inspection.
The timing adds a layer of significance that did not exist during any of the previous 12 Starship flights. This is the first time SpaceX has attempted to launch Starship since the company made its stock market debut in June, listing under ticker SPCX at $135 per share. Public investors are now watching every Starship outcome in real time, and a last-second abort carries more visibility than it would have six months ago.
Flight 13 was designed to be one of the most consequential tests in the program’s history. It was set to carry 20 Starlink V3 satellites, the first operational payload Starship has ever attempted to deploy. Six of those satellites carried external cameras to photograph Starship’s heat shield from the outside during flight, which would act as a self-inspection approach SpaceX has never attempted before. The mission also needed to complete a Raptor engine relight in space, a step SpaceX skipped on Flight 12 in May after losing an engine during ascent. That Flight 12 booster also flipped 90 degrees off course during its boostback burn when five engines failed to reignite.
SpaceX has not announced an official next launch date. Musk’s “early next week” window points to July 21 or 22 at the earliest, pending the engine swap and a return to the pad.
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.
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
