News
Rocket Lab to build reusable Neutron rocket factory and launch pad in Virginia
Rocket Lab has selected Virginian island to host the first launch site, factory, and landing pad for its next-generation Neutron rocket.
In a move reminiscent of SpaceX’s Starbase Starship factory and launch sites, Rocket Lab plans to build and launch its Neutron rocket in more or less adjacent facilities within NASA’s Wallops Flight Facility and Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport on Virginia’s Eastern Shore. Rocket Lab estimates that this new facility will bring over 250 jobs to the area, including engineers, technicians, and support staff that will be working at the complex.
The 250,000-square-foot facility will support Neutron production, assembly, and integration within spitting distance of its first orbital launch site. The site will be Rocket Lab’s third main rocket development and production facility, joining a small factory and headquarters in Huntington Beach, California, and a more substantial Auckland, New Zealand factory. Rocket Lab’s Auckland factory is dedicated to manufacturing the company’s smaller Electron rocket, which (for now) is exclusively launched out of pads located on the north island’s Māhia Peninsula. Neutron’s Virginia manufacturing complex will be in close proximity to Rocket Lab’s lone American Electron launch pad (LC-2), which is also located at Wallops.
However, Electron is merely Rocket Lab’s first step into orbital rocketry Neutron, Rocket Lab’s next rocket, will be capable of launching at least 8 tons (~17,600 lb) into low Earth orbit (LEO). Borrowing heavily from experience with Electron, Neutron will be the first medium-lift rocket made primarily of carbon fiber composites.
Unlike Electron, though, Neutron is being designed from the ground up for partial reusability. Powered by its reusable Archimedes engines, Rocket Lab believes the Neutron launch vehicle will be ideal for satellite constellation launches but also be sized right to support a range of other missions, including deep space exploration and, potentially, human spaceflight. In practice, even though Neutron’s design is substantially different, the rocket is effectively a half-scale Falcon 9 with some noteworthy modifications. Both are two-stage rockets with expendable upper stages and reusable boosters and fairings. With fairing and booster recovery, Falcon 9 is able to launch about 16 tons (~35,000 lb) to LEO – twice Neutron’s 8 tons.
Neutron stands at approximately 131 feet tall (39.9 meters) and between 5 and 7 meters (16-23 ft) wide – more than twice the height and 4-6 times the width of Electron. Because of its size and performance, Rocket Lab expects Neutron to be a strong competitor with other large launch providers, including SpaceX. As far as cost per launch, Beck has declined to provide an estimate beyond stating that “ it would be a pointless exercise [if Rocket Lab] didn’t think that it would be very cost-competitive with anything that’s currently in the market or being proposed.” Currently, the company’s Electron rocket is sold for about $7-8 million per launch. SpaceX, their largest prospective competitor, has sold Falcon 9s for as little as $50 million, while executives have indicated that the rocket costs the company just $28 million for a launch with a reused booster and fairing.
Rocket Lab has received strong support from the Commonwealth of Virginia and the Virginia Economic Development Partnership is working alongside Accomack County, the Virginia Commercial Space Flight Authority (Virginia Space), and the General Assembly’s Major Employment and Investment (MEI) Project Approval Commission to help expedite the process. That support is one of the primary reasons Rocket Lab selected Virginia of all places to build its first Neutron hub. According to Rocket Lab, as part of the Commonwealth’s proposal, “$30 million has been set aside for infrastructure and operational systems improvements to the Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport where the Neutron launch site will be located, along with $15 million from the MEI Project Approval Commission in site improvements and building construction in support of Neutron.”
Shaun D’Mello, the company’s Vice President stated, “We’ve enjoyed a solid partnership with Virginia for years that will no doubt be strengthened with Neutron. We have a shared mission to develop Rocket Lab’s presence at the Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport into a strategic national asset that provides responsive, reliable, reusable space launch through Neutron and Electron, and breaking ground on the site soon is a significant and impelling step toward that future.”
A public target has not been set for the completion of the factory and launch site but Rocket Lab states that they “expect to begin construction promptly.” Neutron, scheduled to launch as earlier as 2024, has already generated some degree of demand, and the United States Space Force recently decided to invest $24 million in its development.
Rocket Lab revealed the news of Neutron’s first factory and launch site comes on the same day as the first orbital launch from Launch Complex 1’s new Pad B. To learn more about Pad B and Rocket Lab’s existing Electron launch facilities, click here.
Elon Musk
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Four Raptor engines failed to ignite at T-zero, forcing SpaceX to scrub Starship Flight 13 Thursday.
SpaceX scrubbed the Starship Flight 13 launch attempt Thursday evening at the last possible moment, after four of the Super Heavy booster’s 33 Raptor 3 engines failed to ignite during the startup sequence. The 90-minute window had opened at 6:45 p.m. EDT from Starbase in Boca Chica, Texas, and the countdown had proceeded without issue all day, with more than 11.5 million pounds of liquid methane and liquid oxygen being fully loaded into the rocket before the automated abort triggered. SpaceX’s launch directors posted on X, “Standing down from today’s flight test attempt,” and shut down the livestream shortly after.
Musk confirmed the root cause within hours. “Some of the engines didn’t start, triggering an automatic launch abort,” he wrote on X. “To be confident of a good flight, 2 Raptors will be removed and replaced. Most probable launch timing is early next week.” SpaceX engineers began draining propellant tanks immediately and Booster 20 was rolled back to its hangar for inspection.
The timing adds a layer of significance that did not exist during any of the previous 12 Starship flights. This is the first time SpaceX has attempted to launch Starship since the company made its stock market debut in June, listing under ticker SPCX at $135 per share. Public investors are now watching every Starship outcome in real time, and a last-second abort carries more visibility than it would have six months ago.
Flight 13 was designed to be one of the most consequential tests in the program’s history. It was set to carry 20 Starlink V3 satellites, the first operational payload Starship has ever attempted to deploy. Six of those satellites carried external cameras to photograph Starship’s heat shield from the outside during flight, which would act as a self-inspection approach SpaceX has never attempted before. The mission also needed to complete a Raptor engine relight in space, a step SpaceX skipped on Flight 12 in May after losing an engine during ascent. That Flight 12 booster also flipped 90 degrees off course during its boostback burn when five engines failed to reignite.
SpaceX has not announced an official next launch date. Musk’s “early next week” window points to July 21 or 22 at the earliest, pending the engine swap and a return to the pad.
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.
The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.
Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:
“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”
The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:
“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”
Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
