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

Elon Musk reveals SpaceX’s target for Starship’s 10th launch

Elon Musk has revealed SpaceX’s target timeline for the next Starship launch, which will be the tenth in program history.

Published

on

Credit: SpaceX

Elon Musk has revealed SpaceX’s target timeline for the next Starship launch, which will be the tenth in program history.

Musk says SpaceX is aiming for a timeline of roughly three weeks from now, which would come about ten weeks after the previous launch.

Coincidentally, it would bring the two launches 69 days apart, and if you know anything about Elon Musk, that would be an ideal timeline between two launches.

SpaceX is coming off a test flight in which it lost both the Super Heavy Booster and the Upper Stage in the previous launch. The Super Heavy Booster was lost six minutes and sixteen seconds into the flight, while SpaceX lost communication with the Ship at 46 minutes and 48 seconds.

Musk is aiming for the tenth test flight to take place in early August, he revealed on X:

Advertisement

This will be SpaceX’s fourth test flight of the Starship program in 2025, with each of the previous three flights bringing varying results.

IFT-7 in January brought SpaceX its second successful catch of the Super Heavy Booster in the chopstick arms of the launch tower. The ship was lost after exploding during its ascent over the Turks and Caicos Islands.

IFT-8 was on March 6, and SpaceX caught the booster once again, but the Upper Stage was once again lost.

Advertisement

The most recent flight, IFT-9, took place on May 27 and featured the first reused Super Heavy Booster. However, both the Booster and Upper Stage were lost.

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) hit SpaceX with a mishap investigation for Flight 9 on May 30.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Elon Musk confirms Tesla is already rolling out a new feature for in-car Grok

Tesla is already making in-car Grok more robust with a simple but effective feature that CEO Elon Musk says is “coming.”

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla CEO Elon Musk has confirmed that the company will roll out a new feature for in-car Grok as it is rolling out to vehicles for the first time.

Grok was just recently added as a feature to Tesla vehicles within the past week, but owners are already requesting some small changes to make it more convenient to use.

Tesla debuts hands-free Grok AI with update 2025.26: What you need to know

The first is already on the way, Musk confirmed, as WholeMarsBlog requested a simple, but useful feature for Grok as it is used within Tesla vehicles.

Whole Mars requested that “Hey Grok” be used as a wake word, automatically activating the AI assistant without having to touch any buttons. Musk confirmed it is already in development and on the way to vehicles:

Advertisement

This feature is incredibly similar to that of “Hey Siri” with iPhones and other iOS devices. The phone will recognize your voice and hear that prompt, automatically activating Siri. Apple’s assistant will then perform whatever task it is asked to perform. It’s a simple but effective performance feature.

Grok is already getting its first reviews from owners as it rolls out to owners for the first time. It is a long time coming, too. Tesla has been hinting that Grok would be enabled in the vehicles for a while now, and it just started its initial rollout last week.

Advertisement

Grok is available in vehicles with the AMD chip and requires Premium Connectivity or a WiFi connection to use.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Tesla reveals key detail of Supercharger Diner, but it’s bigger than you think

Tesla has finally released one key detail about the Supercharger Diner, and it is bigger than what it appears at face-value.

Published

on

tesla-diner-supercharger
Credit: Tesla

Tesla has revealed a key detail of its Supercharger Diner as its launch date appears to be nearing, based on what we are seeing at the site currently.

The Supercharger Diner is located on Santa Monica Boulevard in Los Angeles and was first proposed as an idea by CEO Elon Musk back in 2018. Musk envisioned a drive-in movie-style 1950s-inspired diner that would feature elements such as servers on roller skates, large movie screens, and a menu inspired by classic treats from several decades ago.

A project that first broke ground in 2023, the Supercharger Diner has been in development for over two years, as Tesla performed demolition work at the site back in February of that year.

It has slowly moved forward, and drone footage shot this week seems to show things are nearly up and running. Musk even mentioned that he had eaten at the Diner Supercharger this week.

There are still details that Tesla has yet to announce and confirm. The most important thing is regarding the menu that will be served at the diner.

Advertisement

Tesla has not hinted at what it will be making for patrons at the restaurant, but Musk commended the food and said the diner would be one of the coolest spots in LA.

However, we now have details on another important thing about the restaurant: the hours.

Images taken by Aaron Cash of ABetterTheater.com show the diner will be open 24/7, as it appears on the front doors of the diner:

Advertisement

At first thought, it seems this will operate like any other diner, as many are open for 24 hours a day. Diners typically serve large menus with numerous options, catering to the tastes and moods of anyone who walks in.

People of all walks of life eat at diners, as the food is typically affordable, tasty, and available at any hour to serve those who are night owls or those who work non-typical schedules.

However, Tesla is a bit different, and it seems that this new venture into food service could eventually transition from human servers and cooks to robots, most notably the company’s in-house project of Optimus.

Advertisement

It is something straight out of a Star Wars movie. I can think of Obi-Wan Kenobi visiting Dex in his diner in Attack of the Clones to figure out where a poison dart was sourced from:

Eventually, Optimus will likely be working as an employee in the Tesla Diner, and 24/7 operation will be performed by the humanoid robot that aims to eliminate trivial tasks from humans.

Continue Reading

Trending