News
Ex-SpaceX engineer leads Stratolaunch to major rocket engine test milestone
Led by rocket propulsion expert Jeff Thornburg, Stratolaunch – famous for owning the largest fixed-wing aircraft ever built – has completed the first hot-fire test of a full-scale rocket engine component known as the preburner, a major milestone in the development of any launch vehicle or propulsion system.
Despite the significant size and power of the component, destined to support an engine that will generate 200,000 pounds (~900 kN) of thrust, Thornburg and his team of engineers and technicians have managed to go from designing the preburner to successfully hot-firing a full-scale test article, an extraordinary achievement by any measure.
The team made amazing progress this week! Check out the #PGAEngine preburner’s first hot-fire test at @NASAStennis. #NewUSEngine pic.twitter.com/kKTnf0bj1S
— Stratolaunch (@Stratolaunch) November 6, 2018
Aside from SpaceX, Blue Origin, and Aerojet-Rocketdyne, Stratolaunch is the only private entity developing – let alone testing full-scale parts for – a liquid-fueled rocket engine as large as PGA. Shorthand for the Stratolaunch’s late founder and bankroller Paul G. Allen, PGA is a fuel-rich staged combustion cycle engine that uses liquid hydrogen and oxygen (hydrolox) fuel and oxidizer, typically resulting in high efficiency. In terms of scale and thrust, PGA is very closely comparable to SpaceX’s Merlin 1D engine, which uses kerosene instead of hydrogen but produces roughly 190,000 lbf (850 kN) of thrust and stands 4 feet (1.2m) wide and ~10 feet (~3m) tall.
Another major difference between PGA and Merlin 1D is the fact Merlin 1D’s nozzle is largely optimized for sea level while PGA is being built for a rocket that will be “launched” from a massive plane flying around 35,000 feet (~10.5 km), ultimately resulting in a nozzle that is much wider and longer, featuring nearly the same proportions as fully vacuum-optimized engines like SpaceX’s MVac. By widening the nozzle relative to the rest of the engine, rocket engines are able to operate far more efficiently at higher altitudes, where Earth’s atmosphere thins and exerts less pressure on the escaping exhaust gases. This is visualized well by the visible expansion of rocket exhausts during launches, morphing from a straight cylinder to a massive teardrop-shaped plume. At lower altitudes (and thus higher atmospheric pressures), wider nozzles can produce extreme turbulence and will ultimately shake themselves to destruction, preventing their usage on ground-launched rocket boosters.
Judging from official renders of the engine, PGA’s in-atmosphere variant appears to utilize a form of regenerative nozzle cooling very similar to that used on M1D, where liquid propellant flows through thin capillaries sandwiched between two or more layers of metal to cool the nozzle much like cold water chills the skin of an uninsulated water bottle.
-
- A to-scale comparison of Falcon 1, Pegasus XL, MLV, and Falcon 9. (Teslarati/Stratolaunch/Wikipedia)
-
- A render of Stratolaunch’s impressive PGA engine. Note the giant nozzle relative to the throat. (Stratolaunch)
Testing rocket engine preburners
In the case of staged combustion cycle hydrolox rocket engines, a small portion of liquid oxygen and all of the liquid hydrogen (hence “fuel-rich”) are mixed and combusted to generate hot gas that then spools up the engine’s primary turbopump(s), ultimately drawing fuel and oxidizer into the combustion quickly enough to ignite the engine and generate sustained thrust. The components that get those main turbopumps started are known collectively as the preburner, which is what Stratolaunch successfully tested – at full-scale – for the first time ever last week. For any liquid rocket engine that cannot solely rely on propellant tank pressure to deliver fuel to the combustion chamber, full-scale tests of preburners or gas-generators effectively mark the moment that engines truly become real.
“This is the first step in proving the performance and highly efficient design of the PGA engine. The hot-fire test is an incredible milestone for both the propulsion team and Stratolaunch.” – Jeff Thornburg, VP of Propulsion, Stratolaunch
Stratolaunch’s propulsion team will continue to test the preburner for longer durations and at higher power levels over the next several months, likely optimizing operations and tweaking or upgrading the preburner’s hardware as real tests produce valuable lessons-learned. Built entirely with additive manufacturing (3D printing), the team should be able to rapidly iterate on the physical design of the engine, a rarity in a field where traditional fabrication methods can take weeks or months to produce complex turbomachinery components with mercilessly strict tolerances.
According to Thornburg, the ultimate goal is to continue that additive-manufacturing-only strategy throughout the development of this rocket engine, theoretically enabling unprecedented design flexibility while also slashing production time throughout. PGA will ultimately power the creatively-named Medium Launch Vehicle (MLV), a small-ish air-launched rocket designed to place a respectable 3400 kg into low Earth orbit (LEO) as early as 2022, as well as a Heavy version of MLV and, potentially, a reusable spaceplane somewhere down the line.
-
- PGA’s first full-scale preburner seen during assembly. (Stratolaunch)
-
- PGA’s first full-scale preburner seen during assembly. (Stratolaunch)
-
- Jeff Thornburg stands in front of Stratolaunch’s NASA Stennis Space Center test stand. (Stratolaunch)
-
- The PGA preburner seen after installation at Stennis. (Stratolaunch)
-
- The control center. (Stratolaunch)
-
- MLV is released from Stratolauncher. (Stratolaunch)
-
- A concept video produced by Stratolaunch shows the Roc launching a Kraken rocket. (Stratolaunch, via Wired)
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!
Elon Musk has publicly questioned Moody’s credit assessments following the rating agency’s decision to assign SpaceX a Baa1 investment-grade rating, two notches above Tesla’s Baa3. The comments came amid discussions comparing the two companies’ financial profiles.
SpaceX earned its first-time Baa1 rating with a stable outlook from Moody’s. The agency highlighted the company’s leadership in orbital launches, the growing recurring revenue from its Starlink satellite network, strong vertical integration, U.S. government contracts, and emerging opportunities in AI infrastructure.
These factors were cited as supporting robust cash flows, margin expansion, and financial flexibility.
Musk responded directly: “Tesla’s credit rating is ridiculously low tbh,” and added, “Yeah, makes no sense. Tesla has over $40B in cash, no debt, and is consistently profitable!” His remarks underscored Tesla’s balance sheet strength and profitability at a time when many traditional automakers continue to report losses in the shift to electric vehicles.
Yeah, makes no sense.
Tesla has over $40B in cash, no debt and is consistently profitable!
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 19, 2026
Tesla maintains a leading position in the global EV market, with diversification into energy and storage, battery technology, and robotics through projects like Optimus. Recent financial updates show the company generated positive free cash flow of $1.4 billion in Q1 2026, supported by operating cash flow of $3.9 billion. Cash and short-term investments stood at approximately $44.7 billion.
Moody’s has affirmed Tesla’s Baa3 issuer rating with a stable outlook in periodic reviews, acknowledging the company’s EV leadership, technology strengths, including AI for autonomous vehicles, solid profitability, and strong liquidity.
Tesla (TSLA) scores Baa3 Moody’s rating for ‘stable’ outlook
However, the agency has also noted challenges in the automotive segment and expectations for margin pressures.
Musk’s critique highlights a common debate about how traditional rating methodologies apply to high-growth, capital-intensive technology companies. SpaceX benefits from long-term government-backed contracts and diversified, recurring revenue streams, while Tesla’s valuation reflects heavy investment in future technologies such as autonomy and robotics.
Both ratings remain investment-grade, yet the one-notch difference has fueled online discussion about potential inconsistencies in evaluating innovative firms.
The exchange comes as SpaceX explores financing options following its recent valuation milestones, while Tesla continues executing on its multi-year roadmap. Musk’s pointed response serves as a reminder that credit ratings, though influential for borrowing costs, represent one lens through which markets assess corporate strength—and that company leaders often view their financial positions through the lens of long-term innovation and cash generation rather than short-term risk metrics alone.
A new report from Reuters claims that a transport authority in Sweden is pushing back against the approval of Tesla’s Full Self-Driving suite because it will travel over speed limits.
The report says the Swedish Transport Administration (TRV) recommends the European Union votes against FSD’s approval. TRV believes it should not be approved until Tesla disables FSD’s ability to speed.
TRV sent a letter to the European Union’s Technical Committee on Motor Vehicles (TCMV), which is set to meet on June 30 to discuss the potential approval of the Tesla FSD suite in the country. Tesla, which has received various approvals in Europe over the past two months, has not provided a comment.
Teslas operating on FSD do travel over the speed limit, depending on the Speed Profile that is chosen. Drivers have the ability to disengage FSD at any point; Tesla specifically states that those supervising the suite are responsible for its actions.
Let’s cut to the chase: humans operating any vehicle speed almost daily in the United States. Realistically, speed limits in the U.S. are more frequently treated as speed minimums. However, other countries are different, and driving behaviors are less aggressive.
TRV believes that “allowing automated systems to systematically exceed legal speed limits…risks undermining both the legal framework and the expected safety benefits of vehicle automation,” the report stated. It’s surprising that Tesla has not received this claim from other countries previously.
This could be a good argument to bring Max Speed back, the setting that previously allowed the driver to choose the absolute fastest the car would travel.
This would still put the responsibility of supervision in the hands of the driver. It would allow the driver to choose whether the car would travel over the speed limit or not, acknowledging that they set the speed, and if they get pulled over, there would be no ability to argue it.
However, it does not seem as if this is something Tesla will do, especially considering many U.S. drivers have requested the feature in an effort to eliminate speeding or at least tone it down. The company has not shown any interest in bringing it back.
Tesla has approvals for FSD in Europe in Estonia, Lithuania, Denmark, the Netherlands, and Belgium.
Tesla is going to let you guide Full Self-Driving with Grok in 3 months, CEO Elon Musk confirmed on X.
The response from Musk, which revealed Tesla plans to allow drivers to effectively control the car and its navigation more explicitly using Grok, puts the feature for about September.
A Tesla owner said that Full Self-Driving is great, but owners should be able to “converse with Grok like we can with an Uber driver.” She then used examples like, “Grok, turn right here,” and “Drop us off right here, we’ll walk due to traffic,” and finally,” Drop at entrance first, then park far away.”
Coincidentally, the final piece of dialogue would also mean features like Banish are potentially on the way soon.
This functionality will be there in about 3 months or so
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 18, 2026
Banish is also referred to as “Reverse Summon,” and would enable the car to self-park while dropping occupants off at their destination.
This would be a great way to improve the overall experience while supervising FSD. Navigation is already a major painpoint that many owners complain about. Manual overrides when a maneuver is requested or canceled (like using the turn signal stalk to override a navigation route), do not always work.
The feature could be especially useful in street parking scenarios in a city, where spots are sometimes tough to come by. Many of us who grab dinner in a more populated area will park a street or two over from wherever we’re going, because sometimes you know that’s the best you will get. If a driver using FSD could say, “Hey Grok, turn right here on Queen St. and park in that open spot on the right,” it could save a lot of confusion FSD might have on its own.
Musk teased that a similar feature was “coming” back in February:
Tesla Full Self-Driving set to get an awesome new feature, Elon Musk says
It is certainly surprising that Tesla is doing it at this point. The company’s more recent moves have been more evident of taking control and inputs away from humans and putting them in the AI’s hands more frequently. The biggest example of this was taking away Max Speed in AI4 cars, giving us Speed Profiles, and not having any input on the fastest speed the car will travel.
Of course, giving navigation preferences to Grok is availble already in Teslas, but not at the drop of a hat. Instead, you can suggest a certain route at the beginning of your drive.
Here’s an example of that from December:
🚨🏈 I am taking my parents and Fiancee to the @Ravens game next weekend and asked @Grok to help me route my @Tesla through a specific neighborhood to reach the correct Lot we will park in.
This is a great example of the new @grok nav integration with the Tesla Holiday Update: pic.twitter.com/rPp4I7q8Yv
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) December 13, 2025
Finally, the original post that Musk responded to mentioned a parking preference after dropping off the occupants, which describes the Banish feature that Tesla has teased for years.
We’re not sure if Musk was responding more to the ability to guide the car with Grok, or whether he also was including Banish in the three-month prediction timeframe.
Elon Musk challenges Tesla credit rating from Moody’s after SpaceX gets a higher one
Tesla faces Full Self-Driving pushback in EU over ‘speeding’
