News
Ex-SpaceX engine expert to help design rockets built for launch on world’s largest jet
Stratolaunch, an aerospace company funded by Microsoft-made billionaire Paul Allen to build the world’s largest flightworthy aircraft, has announced a decision to build its own liquid-fueled rockets, to be air-launched from the aforementioned mega-plane.
Targeting an inaugural launch of the first version of the rocket – currently nicknamed “Kraken” – as early as 2022, Stratolaunch has chosen Jeff Thornburg, formerly SpaceX’s Vice President of Propulsion Engineering and the father of the company’s Mars-focused Raptor engine, to lead its foray into in-house rocket propulsion development and manufacturing.
Stratolaunch has confirmed what most people have long speculated: it’s developing its own launch vehicles for its air-launch system, including a reusable space plane that could eventually carry people. pic.twitter.com/nF9lKVe4xk
— Jeff Foust (@jeff_foust) August 20, 2018
But first: building the world’s largest aircraft
Stratolaunch’s first task at hand, however, is to begin flight-testing the largest (hopefully) operational aircraft in history, a prerequisite for the company’s longer-term orbital rocket and spaceplane aspirations. Nicknamed “Roc” after a mythical (and fictional) bird so large it could carry an elephant, the plane certainly lives up to its namesake. Featuring a full six of the same engines that power Boeing’s once-record-breaking 747 airliner and a wingspan that could easily fit three smaller 737 airliners with room to spare, it is genuinely difficult (if not impossible) to successfully convey the sheer scale of Roc outside of witnessing it in person.
Stationed in California’s Mojave Desert, the aircraft’s one and only copy is, for the most part, completed and has spent the brunt of 2018 conducting runway taxi tests, hopefully culminating in an inaugural flight test later this year or early next year. Designed to lift orbital-class rockets weighing as much as 250 metric tons (550,000 lb) to an altitude of at least 9100 meters (30,000 feet), the primary benefit of using aircraft as launch platforms derives from the simple fact that the atmospheric density at 30,000 feet is more than three times less than that at sea level. Similar to aircraft, rocket performance dramatically improves as atmospheric density decreases: less atmosphere means lower drag and pressure.
Rockets that launch from sea-level have to grapple with the difficulties of Earth’s relatively thick atmosphere at that height, with major launch events like “Max-Q” being big concerns almost solely because the dense air exerts major forces on launch vehicles and demands extreme measures like throttling down booster engines (very inefficient) and optimizing structures for aerodynamic efficiency despite the fact that rockets spend very little time operating in a significant atmosphere.
A launch pad without a rocket (sort of)
However, the simple fact of the matter is that billionaire Paul Allen’s colossal aircraft essentially does not have a single air-launched rocket in the world that can properly take advantage of its capabilities. Originally sized and designed with an air-launched version of SpaceX’s Falcon 9 in mind, that relationship folded amicably after roughly a year (2012), at which point SpaceX realized it would need to almost completely redesign a unique variant of Falcon 9. Your author will readily admit that they have admired the insanity of such a massive plane while still severely doubting its practical utility.
Thankfully, it appears that Allen is adamantly opposed to the idea that Stratolaunch is some silly whim to build the world’s largest plane. Rather, he is exceptionally reserved and pragmatic when discussing the aerial launch platform, according to a recent and extensive interview by Wired Magazine’s Steven Levy.
“Allen isn’t one to show exuberance, and when he speaks about the plane he focuses on its future utility. ‘When you see that giant plane, it’s a little nutty,’ he says. ‘And you don’t build it unless you’re very serious, not only about wanting to see the plane fly but to see it fulfill its purpose. Which is getting vehicles in orbit.’ – Paul Allen, 2018
-
- Stratolaunch’s Roc shown with a triplet of Orbital ATK Pegasus XL rockets. (Vulcan Space)
-
- Back in 2012, SpaceX briefly entertained the idea of a Falcon 9 variant optimized for air-launch, potentially including crew rating the rocket down the road. (Stratolaunch/Dynetics)
-
- The Roc is inconceivably vast. (Stratolaunch)
Currently, Orbital ATK’s (now Northrop Grumman Innovation Systems) air-launched Pegasus XL rocket is the only “customer” in the world that can realistically use Stratolaunch as a launch platform, not exactly an impressive or sustainable launch vehicle with a maximum performance of less than 450 kg (~1000 lbs) to low Earth orbit for an incredible ~$40 million per (expendable) flight.
To answer that call and ensure Stratolaunch’s utility, the company reportedly began seriously considering its own in-house expendable and reusable rockets and propulsion systems sometime in 2016, plans that have since grown concrete and been publicly embedded into Stratolaunch’s overarching mission. Nicknamed “Kraken” after the mythical sea monster, the company hopes to develop an initially expendable rocket system capable of launching 3400 – 6000 kg (~7500 – 13250 lbs) into low Earth orbit with single booster and triple booster variants. Further down the line, Stratolaunch is eyeing the design and production of a fully and rapidly reusable orbital spaceplane, potentially including a version that would carry astronauts into space.
-
- A concept video produced by Stratolaunch shows the Roc launching a Kraken rocket. (Stratolaunch, via Wired)
-
- A concept video produced by Stratolaunch shows the Roc launching a Kraken rocket. (Stratolaunch, via Wired)
-
- A concept video produced by Stratolaunch shows the Roc launching a Kraken rocket. (Stratolaunch, via Wired)
-
- SpaceX’s subscale Raptor engine has completed more than 1200 seconds of testing in less than two years. (SpaceX)
-
- BFS (circa 2017) shows off its complement of SL and Vacuum Raptor engines. SpaceX is moving back to something similar to this. (SpaceX)
Normally, one might simply roll their eyes at yet another startup touting small(ish) expendable rockets with first launches no earlier than the early 2020s – the market is getting to be absurdly and impossibly overcrowded at this point. However, Stratolaunch differs for one fundamental and reason: they have placed ex-SpaceX propulsion executive and expert Jeff Thornburg at the helm of the company’s freshly public rocket propulsion wing. While at SpaceX, Mr. Thornburg spent all but one of his five years with the company (2011-2015) single-mindedly focused on the development and engineering of all aspects of the Raptor rocket engine, a next-generation propulsion system designed to enable SpaceX’s sustainable colonization of Mars.
Raptor is an exceptional rocket engine thanks in no small part to Thornburg’s brilliance as a propulsion engineer, and that same brilliance and half-decade of experience at the most successful rocket startup in existence could ultimately prove a massive boon for Stratolaunch’s otherwise interesting but unexceptional expendable rocket concepts.
Put simply, under Jeff Thornburg’s direction and with access to founder Paul Allen’s considerable wealth, Stratolaunch is undoubtedly worth keeping a close eye in the future, both far and near.
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!
Tesla rolled out Full Self-Driving version 14.2 yesterday to members of the Early Access Program (EAP). Expectations were high, and Tesla surely delivered.
With the rollout of Tesla FSD v14.2, there were major benchmarks for improvement from the v14.1 suite, which spanned across seven improvements. Our final experience with v14.1 was with v14.1.7, and to be honest, things were good, but it felt like there were a handful of regressions from previous iterations.
While there were improvements in brake stabbing and hesitation, we did experience a few small interventions related to navigation and just overall performance. It was nothing major; there were no critical takeovers that required any major publicity, as they were more or less subjective things that I was not particularly comfortable with. Other drivers might have been more relaxed.
With v14.2 hitting our cars yesterday, there were a handful of things we truly noticed in terms of improvement, most notably the lack of brake stabbing and hesitation, a major complaint with v14.1.x.
However, in a 62-minute drive that was fully recorded, there were a lot of positives, and only one true complaint, which was something we haven’t had issues with in the past.
The Good
Lack of Brake Stabbing and Hesitation
Perhaps the most notable and publicized issue with v14.1.x was the presence of brake stabbing and hesitation. Arriving at intersections was particularly nerve-racking on the previous version simply because of this. At four-way stops, the car would not be assertive enough to take its turn, especially when other vehicles at the same intersection would inch forward or start to move.
This was a major problem.
However, there were no instances of this yesterday on our lengthy drive. It was much more assertive when arriving at these types of scenarios, but was also more patient when FSD knew it was not the car’s turn to proceed.
Can report on v14.2 today there were ZERO instances of break stabbing or hesitation at intersections today
It was a significant improvement from v14.1.x
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) November 21, 2025
This improvement was the most noticeable throughout the drive, along with fixes in overall smoothness.
Speed Profiles Seem to Be More Reasonable
There were a handful of FSD v14 users who felt as if the loss of a Max Speed setting was a negative. However, these complaints will, in our opinion, begin to subside, especially as things have seemed to be refined quite nicely with v14.2.
Freeway driving is where this is especially noticeable. If it’s traveling too slow, just switch to a faster profile. If it’s too fast, switch to a slower profile. However, the speeds seem to be much more defined with each Speed Profile, which is something that I really find to be a huge advantage. Previously, you could tell the difference in speeds, but not in driving styles. At times, Standard felt a lot like Hurry. Now, you can clearly tell the difference between the two.
It seems as if Tesla made a goal that drivers should be able to tell which Speed Profile is active if it was not shown on the screen. With v14.1.x, this was not necessarily something that could be done. With v14.2, if someone tested me on which Speed Profile was being used, I’m fairly certain I could pick each one.
Better Overall Operation
I felt, at times, especially with v14.1.7, there were some jerky movements. Nothing that was super alarming, but there were times when things just felt a little more finicky than others.
v14.2 feels much smoother overall, with really great decision-making, lane changes that feel second nature, and a great speed of travel. It was a very comfortable ride.
The Bad
Parking
It feels as if there was a slight regression in parking quality, as both times v14.2 pulled into parking spots, I would have felt compelled to adjust manually if I were staying at my destinations. For the sake of testing, at my first destination, I arrived, allowed the car to park, and then left. At the tail-end of testing, I walked inside the store that FSD v14.2 drove me to, so I had to adjust the parking manually.
This was pretty disappointing. Apart from parking at Superchargers, which is always flawless, parking performance is something that needs some attention. The release notes for v14.2. state that parking spot selection and parking quality will improve with future versions.
Any issues with parking on your end? 14.1.7 didn’t have this trouble with parking pic.twitter.com/JPLRO2obUj
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) November 21, 2025
However, this was truly my only complaint about v14.2.
You can check out our full 62-minute ride-along below:
Elon Musk
SpaceX issues statement on Starship V3 Booster 18 anomaly
The incident unfolded during gas-system pressure testing at the company’s Massey facility in Starbase, Texas.
SpaceX has issued an initial statement about Starship Booster 18’s anomaly early Friday. The incident unfolded during gas-system pressure testing at the company’s Massey facility in Starbase, Texas.
SpaceX’s initial comment
As per SpaceX in a post on its official account on social media platform X, Booster 18 was undergoing gas system pressure tests when the anomaly happened. Despite the nature of the incident, the company emphasized that no propellant was loaded, no engines were installed, and personnel were kept at a safe distance from the booster, resulting in zero injuries.
“Booster 18 suffered an anomaly during gas system pressure testing that we were conducting in advance of structural proof testing. No propellant was on the vehicle, and engines were not yet installed. The teams need time to investigate before we are confident of the cause. No one was injured as we maintain a safe distance for personnel during this type of testing. The site remains clear and we are working plans to safely reenter the site,” SpaceX wrote in its post on X.
Incident and aftermath
Livestream footage from LabPadre showed Booster 18’s lower half crumpling around the liquid oxygen tank area at approximately 4:04 a.m. CT. Subsequent images posted by on-site observers revealed extensive deformation across the booster’s lower structure. Needless to say, spaceflight observers have noted that Booster 18 would likely be a complete loss due to its anomaly.
Booster 18 had rolled out only a day earlier and was one of the first vehicles in the Starship V3 program. The V3 series incorporates structural reinforcements and reliability upgrades intended to prepare Starship for rapid-reuse testing and eventual tower-catch operations. Elon Musk has been optimistic about Starship V3, previously noting on X that the spacecraft might be able to complete initial missions to Mars.
Investor's Corner
Tesla analyst maintains $500 PT, says FSD drives better than humans now
The team also met with Tesla leaders for more than an hour to discuss autonomy, chip development, and upcoming deployment plans.
Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) received fresh support from Piper Sandler this week after analysts toured the Fremont Factory and tested the company’s latest Full Self-Driving software. The firm reaffirmed its $500 price target, stating that FSD V14 delivered a notably smooth robotaxi demonstration and may already perform at levels comparable to, if not better than, average human drivers.
The team also met with Tesla leaders for more than an hour to discuss autonomy, chip development, and upcoming deployment plans.
Analysts highlight autonomy progress
During more than 75 minutes of focused discussions, analysts reportedly focused on FSD v14’s updates. Piper Sandler’s team pointed to meaningful strides in perception, object handling, and overall ride smoothness during the robotaxi demo.
The visit also included discussions on updates to Tesla’s in-house chip initiatives, its Optimus program, and the growth of the company’s battery storage business. Analysts noted that Tesla continues refining cost structures and capital expenditure expectations, which are key elements in future margin recovery, as noted in a Yahoo Finance report.
Analyst Alexander Potter noted that “we think FSD is a truly impressive product that is (probably) already better at driving than the average American.” This conclusion was strengthened by what he described as a “flawless robotaxi ride to the hotel.”
Street targets diverge on TSLA
While Piper Sandler stands by its $500 target, it is not the highest estimate on the Street. Wedbush, for one, has a $600 per share price target for TSLA stock.
Other institutions have also weighed in on TSLA stock as of late. HSBC reiterated a Reduce rating with a $131 target, citing a gap between earnings fundamentals and the company’s market value. By contrast, TD Cowen maintained a Buy rating and a $509 target, pointing to strong autonomous driving demonstrations in Austin and the pace of software-driven improvements.
Stifel analysts also lifted their price target for Tesla to $508 per share over the company’s ongoing robotaxi and FSD programs.
Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.2 – Full Review, the Good and the Bad
SpaceX issues statement on Starship V3 Booster 18 anomaly
