Connect with us

News

ICBM rocket shopping: Elon Musk did it in Russia, so why not do it in the United States?

The ultimate goal of launching rockets is to get us exploring and building in space, not picking winners and losers. Simply put, if you can’t compete with the mousetraps on the market, you haven’t actually built a better mousetrap. Repurposed ICBM motors for rocket engines are not the problem.

Published

on

Gemini 10 launches using a modified TItan ICBM motor.
Gemini 10 launches using a modified TItan ICBM motor.

Gemini 10 launches on a modified Titan ICBM motor. Credit: NASA on The Commons.

A Disagreement Among Star Travelers

There’s a debate going on among the government “powers that be” and commercial space companies over the use of excess intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) motors to launch rockets. Currently, these motors are banned from being used for commercial purposes, although military and civil launches are okay.

One side argues that the ban should be lifted because

  • the missile parts provide a reliable, cost-effective means for space access; and
  • it benefits taxpayers through recouped monies from private sales.

The other side wants the ban maintained because

  • flooding the market with cheaper, “off-the-shelf” rocket parts could hinder the innovation and development of new rocket technologies by lowering demand for them; and
  • larger companies will take away their market share through easy access to cheaper motors.

This same debate created the ban in the 1990s, and it should be mentioned that the main proponent of lifting the ban was a big part of passing it in the first place. It is also only fair to mention that this main proponent is a very large, established rocket company while the opponents are mostly smaller competitors.

Putting It All Into Perspective

First, it’s important to consider a reality-based context before taking a position on this. Absent another world war, globalization is here to stay, meaning that if a company in the United States cannot offer launch services at a Lawmakers cannot make the ICBM problem just go away through legislation. competitive price point, their potential customers will go elsewhere. Since these customers are not exclusively American companies, U.S. lawmakers cannot simply make the problem go away through legislation by restricting the nationality of launch providers.

Second, it’s important to frame this issue using marketplace case studies relevant to the situation found here. Old technology is constantly giving way to updated and new technology, demonstrating that innovation is driven by a variety of factors, not just the pure need for a technology to exist.

Finally, it’s important to fully understand the motives of all parties involved. The commercial space industry is, by definition, business-oriented. At a fundamental level, all parties involved are concerned primarily with their own best interest, i.e., their ability to make a profit.

Space Access Should Be More Affordable

In my opinion, the ban should be lifted, as my position on issues like this will always tend towards expanding access rather than restricting it. Achieving democratized space travel will require affordable accessibility to space, and one of the best ways to drive costs down is to not spend valuable resources “reinventing the wheel” if existing resources work well for current needs. This isn’t to say that innovation isn’t necessary, but rather that different Don't reinvent the wheel when ICBM engines are available.missions have different needs, and the existence of one option doesn’t preclude the need for other options.

The car industry is a good case study to compare to. The fact that older cars
exist does not prevent newer, generally improved cars from being developed and sold each year. Gasoline is a proven standard to fuel vehicles, but the demand for electric vehicles is getting louder. It’s the demand for better technology that moves this process of innovation forward.

The companies involved in this debate are profit-driven. What would motivate a company to keep inexpensive, proven technology out of a market they were competing in? In my opinion, the question itself contains the answer. Competition is a proven way to drive development, and the argument that a market flooded with competition would hurt competition has somewhat circular logic.Arguing against ICBM engines is circular logic.

I do think it is fair to be concerned that the nature of competing against government for a product undermines the concept of a fair market; however, the global nature of launch services and the expanding need for more innovative solutions, i.e., more powerful rocket engines for the upcoming long-distance space missions, mitigate this concern.

Advertisement

The government is an ICBM retailer, not a competitor.In the current environment, American launch providers are losing business to non-American launch providers, most of which are either heavily subsidized by their governments or are the governments themselves. In order for American launch providers to afford the costs of innovation and development, they need to be able to fairly compete in the global market for a customer base. It is also important to note that the rocket motor is only one part of the process of providing launch services. In that light, opening the ICBM market to American launch providers doesn’t make the American government the competitor as much as it is a retailer selling certain parts which make up a whole rocket product.

Elon Musk, Russians, and ICBM Engines (Oh, my!)

To frame this debate in another light, recall that Elon Musk’s initial space dreams involved purchasing ICBM motors from Russia to send dehydrated plant seeds to Mars. He wanted to accomplish something inspirational without diving head first into the business of building rockets. Fortunately for us, SpaceX was born through that process; however, Quote_Elon10Percentimagine a future, space-inspired millionaire looking to make a similar contribution except the purpose would ultimately be commercial. Why deny the option of a rocket built with “off-the-shelf” parts? There aren’t many Elon Musk types out there willing to invest most of their own personal fortune for a ten percent chance of success at building a rocket engine from scratch, but every time technology is sent into space, it moves us forward.

Elon Musk’s ICBM story isn’t the only thing worth noting in this debate. Unfortunately for supporters of the ban, SpaceX essentially renders their argument moot because SpaceX’s innovation and resulting lower launch price tag are what’s making Russian space authorities somewhat cranky about the business they’re usurping from them. Clearly, innovation is still possible even with other ICBM-based rockets on the market.

In Summary

The ultimate goal of launching rockets is to get us exploring and building in space, and this is hindered when the regulatory environment has the effect of hand picking winners and losers. Restricting ICBM motors from being on the commercial market does exactly that. This doesn’t advance the long term goals of space exploration. It only interferes with getting technology into orbit and beyond by restricting the capital available to develop better technology.

Don't let ICBM engines be your excuse not to build a better engine.The argument that innovation is hurt by a market full of ICBM motors is one based on a desire to control market forces in an unfair way. Simply put, if you can’t compete with the mousetraps on the market, you haven’t actually built a better mousetrap, and there’s nothing to prevent you from selling existing mousetraps in service packages while you develop better ones.Banning ICBM rocket engines doesn't help further space exploration.

Granted, as Elon Musk has reminded us in several interviews, rockets are hard, making the business of rockets even harder. Imagine, however, if the government banned access to all major highways, an existing tax-funded resource, because there was a need for a surface material that was resistant to pot holes and existing asphalt mixes hindered its development. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see what a bad idea that would be and what type of impact it would have on those needing the highways to conduct their business, especially while other countries still had their road systems up and running.

Autobahn, anyone?

Advertisement

Accidental computer geek, fascinated by most history and the multiplanetary future on its way. Quite keen on the democratization of space. | It's pronounced day-sha, but I answer to almost any variation thereof.

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

Tesla Board Chair discusses what is being done to protect CEO Elon Musk

Published

on

Credit: xAI

Tesla Board Chair Robyn Denholm met with Bloomberg this morning to discuss a variety of topics, but perhaps one of the most interesting was her comments on what is being done to protect company CEO Elon Musk.

After the assassination of right-wing political commentator Charlie Kirk this week, there have been concerns about Musk’s safety, as well as that of other high-profile business leaders and political figures.

Earlier this week, Musk said himself that his security detail would be increased significantly following Kirk’s death, a move that many investors and fans of the company had requested because of political violence.

Elon Musk assures Tesla investors he will enhance his security detail

“Definitely need to enhance security,” Musk said. Tesla spent $3.3 million on Musk’s security in 2024 and January and February 2025. For reference, Meta spent over $27 million on Mark Zuckerberg’s security last year, which is higher than any other tech CEO.

Advertisement

During Denholm’s appearance on Bloomberg TV earlier today, she stated that the company has been focused on Musk’s security detail for “many years,” especially considering he is one of the richest people on Earth and holds an incredible amount of influence.

“It is something that we take very seriously; he takes it very seriously as well. So, again, from a board perspective, it is something we’ve discussed at length,” Denholm said.

Advertisement

Denholm added that she believes “there is not anyone in a boardroom that is not touched by what has happened with Charlie Kirk.”

Although Musk’s political involvement has toned down significantly in the past, he still has enemies, especially based on groups that oppose him and the company specifically. Based on this week’s events, it feels that increased security is a necessary expense Tesla must account for.

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

Tesla bear turns bullish for two reasons as stock continues boost

“I think from a trading perspective, it looks very interesting,” Nathan said, citing numerous signs of strength, such as holding its 200-day moving average and holding against its resistance level.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla Manufacturing

A Tesla bear is changing his tune, turning bullish for two reasons as the company’s stock has continued to get a boost over the past month.

Dan Nathan, a notorious skeptic of Tesla shares, said he is changing his tune, at least in the short term, on the company’s stock because of “technicals and sentiment,” believing the company is on track for a strong Q3, but also an investment story that will slowly veer away from its automotive business.

“I think from a trading perspective, it looks very interesting,” Nathan said, citing numerous signs of strength, such as holding its 200-day moving average and holding against its resistance level.

He also said he believes a rally for the stock could continue as it heads into the end of the quarter, especially as the $7,500 electric vehicle tax credit is coming to an end at the end of the month.

With that being said, he believes the consensus for Q3 deliveries is “probably low,” as he believes Wall Street is likely underestimating what Tesla will bring to the table on October 1 or 2 when it reports numbers for the quarter.

Advertisement

Tesla shares are already up over five percent today, with gains exceeding nine percent over the past five trading days, and more than fourteen percent in the past month.

While some analysts are looking at the performance of other Mag 7 stocks, movement on rates from the Federal Reserve, and other broader market factors as reasoning for Tesla’s strong performance, it appears some movement could be related to the company’s recent developments instead.

Advertisement

Over the past week, Tesla has made some strides in its Robotaxi program, including a new license to test the platform in the State of Nevada, which we reported on.

Tesla lands regulatory green light for Robotaxi testing in new state

Additionally, the company is riding the tails of the end of the EV tax credit, as inventory, both new and used, is running extremely low, generally speaking. Many markets do not have any vehicles to purchase as of right now, making delivery by September 30 extremely difficult.

However, there has been some adjustments to the guidelines by the IRS, which can be read here:

Tesla set to win big after IRS adjusts EV tax credit rules

Advertisement

Tesla is trading at around $389 at 10:56 a.m. on the East Coast.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla lands regulatory green light for Robotaxi testing in new state

This will be the third state in total where Tesla is operating Robotaxi, following Austin and California.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla has landed a regulatory green light to test its Robotaxi platform in a new state, less than three months after the ride-hailing service launched in Texas.

Tesla first launched its driverless Robotaxi suite in Austin, Texas, back on June 22. Initially offering rides to a small group of people, Tesla kept things limited, but this was not to be the mentality for very long.

It continued to expand the rider population, the service area, and the vehicle fleet in Austin.

The company also launched rides in the Bay Area, but it does use a person in the driver’s seat to maintain safety. In Austin, the “Safety Monitor” is present in the passenger’s seat during local rides, and in the driver’s seat for routes that involve highway driving.

Tesla is currently testing the Robotaxi platform in other states. We reported that it was testing in Tempe, Arizona, as validation vehicles are traveling around the city in preparation for Robotaxi.

Advertisement

Tesla looks to make a big splash with Robotaxi in a new market

Tesla is also hoping to launch in Florida and New York, as job postings have shown the company’s intention to operate there.

However, it appears it will launch in Nevada before those states, as the company submitted its application to obtain a Testing Registry certification on September 3. It was processed by the state’s Department of Motor Vehicles Office of Business Licensing on September 10.

It will then need to self-certify for operations, essentially meaning they will need to comply with various state requirements.

This will be the third state in total where Tesla is operating Robotaxi, following Austin and California.

CEO Elon Musk has stated that he believes Robotaxi will be available to at least half of the U.S. population by the end of the year. Geographically, Tesla will need to make incredible strides over the final four months of the year to achieve this.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending