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.
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 
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 
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.
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.
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, 
imagine 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.
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.
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?
In a remarkable demonstration of how advanced vehicle technology can intersect with family care and rapid response, a Tesla Model Y equipped with Full Self-Driving (FSD) Supervised helped save a driver’s life during a severe heart attack. The incident, which occurred on November 15, 2025, highlights the life-saving potential of Tesla’s connected ecosystem.
John Brandt, 55, was driving his new 2026 Model Y Launch Edition on Interstate 20 from Atlanta toward Birmingham early that morning. He had recently received the FSD v14.1.3 update. Around 3:50 a.m., he began experiencing severe chest pain. Barely conscious and unable to safely control the vehicle, John managed to call his son, Jack Brandt.
FSD Supervised remained engaged, keeping the car steadily on course while John reached out for help.
As an authorized driver on his father’s Tesla account, Jack quickly sprang into action from his own phone. He located Tanner Medical Center in Carrollton, Georgia—a facility equipped for cardiac emergencies—via Google Maps and shared the destination directly through the Tesla app.
A Model Y driver started experiencing a medical emergency with chest pain mid-drive & called his son.
His son then remotely rerouted the car – which had FSD Supervised enabled – to the nearest hospital & let them know the vehicle was en route. ER staff were standing by on… pic.twitter.com/yi1tHISK9y
— Tesla North America (@tesla_na) June 16, 2026
The Model Y responded immediately, rerouting: it took the next exit, turned around on I-20, navigated local roads, and pulled directly up to the emergency room entrance. Jack also alerted hospital staff that a heart attack patient was en route in a Tesla.
Doctors diagnosed John with a massive STEMI heart attack, requiring immediate intervention on three blocked arteries. They later confirmed that without the swift reroute, John likely would not have survived—whether he had pulled over to wait for an ambulance or attempted to continue driving. He received life-saving treatment and is now recovering fully.
Tesla shared the story on X, including an interview video featuring John and Jack reflecting on the event. John described the terrifying onset of symptoms, while Jack detailed the ease of remote intervention thanks to the app’s features. Only authorized users with vehicle access can change navigation destinations, adding a layer of security and family coordination.
This case underscores Tesla’s emphasis on connectivity and supervised autonomy. Features like remote navigation allow loved ones to assist in real-time emergencies, while FSD handles complex driving tasks reliably. Tesla notes that FSD Supervised requires active driver supervision and is not fully autonomous; this was a specific incident, not a general emergency protocol.
The story has resonated widely, with many praising Tesla’s technology for bridging gaps in critical moments. Jack previously shared details on social media in February 2026, and Tesla’s recent post has amplified its reach. As vehicles become smarter and more connected, such integrations could redefine personal safety on the road—turning cars into proactive partners in health crises.
For Tesla owners, the incident serves as a powerful reminder to add trusted family members as authorized drivers and explore FSD capabilities. While no technology replaces professional medical care, this blend of AI-assisted driving and seamless app control proved invaluable. John’s survival stands as a testament to innovation that prioritizes human life.
In a bold declaration on X, xAI CEO Elon Musk announced that its model will be capable of creating full movies by the end of the year. Quoting an xAI post showcasing a stunning AI-generated trailer for Homer’s The Odyssey, Musk simply stated: “Full movies by the end of the year.”
The quoted video, created entirely with the newly released Grok Imagine Video 1.5, demonstrates the rapid strides in AI video generation. Crafted by creator David Thompson, the 2-minute-plus trailer reimagines the ancient epic in the style of a 1970s classical Hollywood blockbuster. It features 36 meticulously consistent shots that form a cohesive narrative world.
Full movies by the end of this year https://t.co/kkBrngWA0X
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 17, 2026
Its realistic nature is truly mind-blowing, and it’s pretty amazing to think that it cool to think it could create an entire movie soon.
The trailer reimagines The Odyssey as a whole, and opens with a concept board outlining the vision: a retelling of the story using 35mm film aesthetics, classical framing, and other elements.
There are a handful of things that truly outline Grok’s capabilities:
- Scale and Physics: A bloodied Spartan helmet rests on a sandy battlefield amid smoke, marching armies, and flocks of birds. Horses gallop, chariots charge, and warriors clash with believable weight and motion.
- Emotional Depth and Dialogue: Close-ups capture intense expressions, as characters deliver lines like a warrior’s grief-stricken speech on a rocking ship.
- Cinematic Workflow: It’s hard to believe AI created this trailer, as editing and suspense are clearly detailed in this trailer
Now, why is this a big deal? AI has been a real threat to the way movies have been made over the past several decades. It’s no secret that the various AI platforms out there are becoming more capable, but Musk has said that he believes things would be “watchable” by the end of this year, and by the end of 2027, Grok would be able to create “really good” movies.
There are several issues that remain, most notably the ability to remain cohesive throughout the length of a film, energy requirements, copyright questions for training data, and artistic intent. Hollywood has created some of the greatest cinematic masterpieces over the past 100 years, but 2026 could be the year AI not only assists but also independently authors cinema.
Tesla is continuing to push the boundaries of vehicle dynamics, as its latest published patent, US12654505B2, or “Suspension Actuator System for a Vehicle,’ which has finally been pushed through.
The design, which is credited to inventors Brian Lee Doorlag, Avraham Kagan, and Justin Sill, introduces a sophisticated hybrid suspension design that blends active motor-driven control with strategic passive elements to deliver superior ride quality, energy efficiency, and resilience against road imperfections, especially potholes.
Suspension Actuator System for a Vehicle@Tesla‘s US20240383297A1 patent introduces an innovative suspension actuator system that transforms vehicle suspension control through an intelligent combination of active and passive control elements.
By implementing both series and… https://t.co/vRvlOu3Dql pic.twitter.com/2WriXgpOvr
— SETI Park (@seti_park) November 27, 2024
At the heart of the system is an active control element powered by an electric motor. This motor drives a belt connected to a ball nut assembly and threaded screw, which adjusts the effective length of the suspension strut in real time.
By extending or retracting, the actuator can lift or lower the wheel more accurately, which can end up countering road disturbances. Sensors, including accelerometers and wheel position monitors, feed data to a suspension control system that processes inputs and commands the motor instantly.
This active component doesn’t work alone. A low-rate air spring mounts in parallel with the actuator. Its primary role is to offset much of the vehicle’s static weight, dramatically reducing the power demand on the motor.
Without this, the active system would constantly fight gravity, draining energy and generating heat. The air spring handles steady-state loads efficiently, allowing the motor to focus on dynamic adjustments.
Complementing this is a series of passive control elements—a spring and an adaptive damper—placed between the actuator and the wheel. This setup filters high-frequency vibrations before they reach the active motor, preventing it from overworking on minor inputs. The adaptive damper, potentially magnetorheological or valve-controlled, further tunes damping electronically for optimal comfort and stability.
How It Differs from Traditional Suspensions
Traditional passive suspensions compromise between comfort and handling, while pure active systems can be power-hungry and complex. Tesla’s hybrid approach resolves this by delegating tasks: the parallel air spring manages weight and low-frequency body motions, the series elements absorb rapid vibrations, and the active actuator tackles larger, lower-frequency events.
The result is a smoother, more isolated cabin experience. High-frequency road noise and harshness diminish, while the vehicle maintains precise control during cornering or acceleration. Energy efficiency improves, too—lower motor loads mean reduced battery drain, potentially extending range in electric vehicles.
How It Mitigates Potholes Specifically
Potholes are a major challenge because they provide a sudden drop to the wheel plunge, jarring the body of the vehicle, risking damage. The patent explicitly addresses this. Upon detecting a pothole (via sensors or predictive mapping), the control system activates
the motor to retract the strut, effectively pulling the wheel upward to minimize downward excursion. The series spring/damper cushions the impact, while the parallel air spring maintains overall support.
This proactive “wheel retraction” prevents sharp jolts, preserving passenger comfort and protecting components. Integrated with Tesla’s road roughness mapping patents, the system could anticipate potholes from fleet data, enabling preemptive adjustments for even smoother navigation.
Future Implications for Tesla Vehicles
This technology builds on Tesla’s existing adaptive dampers and air suspension that is seen in Cybertruck, but advances toward fully active control. It could roll out to future models, including refreshed Cybertrucks or next-gen vehicles, enhancing both daily drivability and off-road capability. By minimizing power use and complexity, it aligns with Tesla’s goals of efficiency and scalability.
In summary, US12654505B2 exemplifies Tesla’s engineering philosophy: intelligent integration over brute force. This hybrid suspension promises quieter, more comfortable rides and robust pothole defense, potentially setting a new standard for automotive comfort. As Tesla iterates, drivers can look forward to roads feeling far less rough.
Tesla Full Self-Driving and App Connectivity save life in medical emergency
Elon Musk predicts Grok will start to challenge Hollywood by the end of 2026
