SpaceX
SpaceX prepares for last launch until August: Caution over cadence
After a second automatic T-10s launch abort Monday night, Elon Musk expressed a welcome prioritization of caution over an attempt to break cadence records. As such, the launch team at LC-39A are standing down an attempt today and instead conducting a full review of the Falcon 9 vehicle and ground systems, pushing the launch to either July 5th or 6th. As Musk transparently phrased it, there is only one chance to get a rocket launch right.
We're going to spend the 4th doing a full review of rocket & pad systems. Launch no earlier than 5th/6th. Only one chance to get it right …
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 4, 2017
Following a truly unprecedented series of launches for the company, there was understandably a bit of annoyance from fans watching the coverage for a second time, as well as from journalists seeking to cover the launch. I think a tweet from former NASA Space Shuttle Program Manager Wayne Hale summed up the proper response most coherently, however, stating that “it’s tough to remain vigilant and do the right thing, extremely tough after a couple of launch scrubs and [with] range closure looming”. Remaining vigilant is precisely what SpaceX is doing by calling off another attempt on July 4th and choosing to instead carefully examine the systems involved to ensure that there is no real issue with pad or vehicle hardware.
For launch companies, there are an untold number of external and internal pressures urging executives to attempt launches, be those financial, political, or something as simple as employees wanting to get home for a holiday. However, past failures of launch vehicles, particularly the Space Shuttle, have demonstrated that constant vigilance is a necessity when dealing with rocketry. Wayne Hale was flight director for forty Shuttle launches. In fact, he became Program Manager the day of the Columbia disaster, which occurred at the beginning of February in 2003.
In this context, his statement is almost certainly intended as positive – albeit solemn – encouragement for the choice to take a more cautious route before attempting another launch. SpaceX itself has experienced two widely publicized failures of the Falcon 9, with the most recent of those having occurred less than ten months ago. After China suffered a complex failure during the second launch of their Long March 5 heavy lift vehicle last Sunday, Musk offered sympathy for those involved. Any failure in the launch industry often acts as a wake-up call for other companies and agencies involved, and undoubtedly becomes a reminder that one cannot become too comfortable or allow launch processes or vehicle manufacturing to become too routine when the stakes are as high as they can be.
Sorry to hear about China launch failure today. I know how painful that is to the people who designed & built it. https://t.co/iOkj6egF3O
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 2, 2017
It goes without saying that SpaceX is sharply aware of the need to ensure reliability and safety as they march ever closer to the debut flight of Crew Dragon and its first crewed launches, likely to occur in early 2018. If the stakes for launching the payloads of commercial customers are already high, the price of failures that could lead to loss of life are unspeakable and ought to humble those fans and bystanders who may be losing patience while waiting for a third (admittedly enthralling) launch. Those eager to watch SpaceX’s live coverage must seek to remember that the launches we love to watch occur because paying customers have placed trust in SpaceX to deliver their payloads to orbit, be those payloads massive geostationary communications satellites or astronauts and cargo headed to the ISS. Rightfully so, the customer will always come first, and routine live coverage of rocket launches must always be treated as the luxury it is for the indefinite future.
SpaceX has successfully recovery and reused both Falcon 9 and Cargo Dragon in the last several weeks, and has also recovered three first stages from the three related launches that occurred in that same time period. (SpaceX)
Admittedly, a cornerstone of SpaceX’s mission as a company is making access to orbit reliable, affordable, and routine, but there will always be risk in rocket launches, just as there will always be risk when one boards a plane, drives a car, or simply walks down the sidewalk along a busy street. Minimizing and reducing the risk present in spaceflight will take a considerable amount of time and effort, and doing what is necessary to prevent failures from negatively impacting the customers that make SpaceX viable as a company is both a rational and ethical strategy.
Returning to current events, the Falcon 9 intended to launch Intelsat 35e went horizontal on July 4, and is likely now in the integration facility present at LC-39A, providing easier access to engineers as they comb over the vehicle to ensure its health. After an absolutely picturesque launch attempt Monday evening, weather is looking even better for a potential launch attempt on either Wednesday or Thursday evening.
If the vehicle and pad cooperate, Intelsat 35e will be a facing send off for the Eastern Range before it shuts down for the remainder of July to undergo routine maintenance. SpaceX currently does not have Vandenberg (West coast) missions scheduled until August, so July will likely see no launches from the company. There is still plenty to be done in lieu of launching customer payloads, however. LC-40, the pad damaged in the Amos-6 static fire incident last September, is currently preparing to be reactivated, with a recent interview of Gwynne Shotwell pointing to its initial availability sometime in August. Once it is reactivated, all single core Falcon launches will be transferred to LC-40, and LC-39A will begin undergoing structural modifications to accommodate both crewed missions in 2018 and Falcon Heavy, which could debut as early as Q4 of 2017.
-
- Intelsat 35e, July 2nd. (SpaceX)
-
- A render of Falcon 9 and Crew Dragon at LC-39A. (SpaceX)
The two most visible changes that will occur at LC-39A will be the installation of additional hold-down clamps and modifications to the Transporter Erector, as well as a Crew Access Arm, which will be attached to the large, vertical structure seen directly right of Falcon 9. Of note, it is very likely that at least two, if not all three of the first Falcon Heavy’s cores are already present at the Cape. After years of being deemed a paper rocket, Falcon Heavy is indeed very real and very close to being able to conduct its first launches.
A month of no launches from SpaceX will undoubtedly be less than thrilling, but the Air Force and Kennedy Space Center employees will get a much-deserved break from a busy launch manifest ahead of what will likely be an even busier final four months of the year. There is a lot to look forward to.
News
SpaceX tells the FCC that Starship Flight 14 is going to orbit
SpaceX filed with the FCC for Starship Flight 14, its first true orbital launch attempt.
SpaceX has asked the Federal Communications Commission for permission to fly Starlink terminals during Starship’s fourteenth flight test, and the filing lays out a genuine trip to orbit, something the program has never attempted.
Every Starship flight so far, including Flight 13’s successful splashdown in the Indian Ocean on July 24, has flown a suborbital arc that ends with the ship reentering the atmosphere within the same hour it launches. The FCC paperwork describes a mission profile built around an actual orbital insertion instead.
The payload is the other half of the story. Flight 13 carried 20 production Starlink V3 satellites, but because that mission never reached orbit, the satellites reentered along with the ship rather than joining the constellation, something Teslarati covered in detail after SpaceX released footage shot from one of those satellites as it drifted away from Starship in space. Flight 14 is designed to close that gap. If the orbital insertion holds, the roughly 20 V3 satellites onboard would separate into an operational orbit and could eventually go into service, each one rated for about 1 terabit per second of downlink capacity by SpaceX’s own account.
SpaceX announces new Starbase for ‘thousands of Starship launches annually’
Elon Musk first flagged the orbital attempt during SpaceX’s August 4 earnings call, the company’s first as a public entity following its June IPO under the ticker SPCX. He also floated catching the ship with the Starbase tower on the same flight, an idea he walked back on August 20, saying the catch attempt would more likely come “in a few months,” as Teslarati reported at the time. Flight 14 will instead target a splashdown for the ship in the Indian Ocean, the same recovery method used since Flight 12.
Hardware has been catching up to the ambition. Booster 21 completed a full 33-engine static fire on August 28, and Ship 41 finished its own six-engine test the week before. An airspace briefing circulated to pilots on August 20 listed September 15 as the target date, later than the end of August window Musk mentioned on the earnings call, though SpaceX has not confirmed a launch date publicly and Starship schedules routinely slip while hardware and FAA paperwork line up.
The FCC filing itself does not guarantee a launch date. It covers communications authority, and not flight readiness, considering SpaceX still needs Ship 41 fully stacked and cleared by the FAA before Flight 14 can fly. But the filing is a real marker of intent and it puts a specific regulatory process behind what had so far only been Musk’s word on the earnings call.
Elon Musk recently restated a fact that still defines SpaceX’s origin story: if Falcon 1’s fourth launch had failed, the company would not exist. The comment answered a reminder that after three consecutive losses, SpaceX had money for only one more attempt.
On X, Peter Diamandis said that the present-day acknowledgement of SpaceX’s success does not discount the rough start the company had. “Almost nobody remembers that Elon’s first rocket failed three times, and there was money for exactly only one more attempt.”
Musk said, “If the 4th launch had failed, SpaceX would not exist.”
If the 4th launch had failed, SpaceX would not exist
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) August 30, 2026
In late 2008, the firm was nearly out of cash. Another failure would have ended payroll, closed the Hawthorne factory, and left the Falcon 9 and Dragon programs as unfinished drawings.
The first flight lifted off from Omelek Island on 24 March 2006. Thirty-three seconds later, a corroded aluminum fitting on a fuel line leaked. Kerosene ignited around the Merlin engine, control was lost, and the vehicle came apart. The small DARPA payload, FalconSAT-2, survived the short flight only to land on a storage shed near the pad. Investigators later traced the fitting to a materials mix-up that should never have reached the rocket.
Flight 2, on 21 March 2007, looked far better at first. The first stage burned cleanly and handed off to the Kestrel-powered upper stage. The vehicle crossed 100 kilometers and reached a peak of about 289 kilometers. Then propellant slosh in the second-stage tank started a circular coning motion that grew until the engine shut down. Telemetry faded as the stage tumbled, and SpaceX had reached space but not orbit. Over the next year, the team redesigned everything from the ground up, including tanks, baffles, and the new regeneratively cooled Merlin 1C.
That engine flew on Flight 3 on 2 August 2008. The first stage performed almost perfectly and reached 217 kilometers. After main-engine cutoff, leftover fuel in the cooling channels produced a faint residual thrust, roughly 10 pounds per square inch of chamber pressure. On a Texas test stand, the effect was invisible beneath ambient air pressure. In vacuum it was enough to push the spent first stage back into the second stage after separation. The stages collided, the upper stage spun, and the mission was lost. Musk later said a slightly longer delay before staging would have saved the flight.
Six weeks later, the team assembled Flight 4 from remaining parts and flew it on 28 September 2008 at 23:15 UTC. The payload was Ratsat, a 165-kilogram aluminum mass simulator built in-house. Staging was delayed so residual thrust could decay. The Kestrel ignited, the fairing split away, and nine and a half minutes after liftoff the vehicle was in orbit. After a coast, the second stage restarted, settling into a 621-by-643-kilometer path at 9.35 degrees inclination. Falcon 1 became the first privately developed liquid-fueled rocket to reach Earth orbit. Musk called the insertion “middle of the bull’s-eye.”
SpaceX restores a Falcon 1 rocket for 10th anniversary of first launch success
That success unlocked NASA’s Commercial Resupply Services award later that year. Without it, there would have been no Falcon 9, no reusable first stages, and no Dragon cargo or crew flights to the International Space Station. Launch prices would have remained far higher. Starlink’s constellation would not exist; broadband from low Earth orbit would still be a paper concept.
Ride-share markets, high launch cadence, and the current pace of lunar and Mars hardware would be years behind. Communications, Earth observation, and the cost of putting anything into space would look more like the 2000s than the 2020s.
One extra second of residual thrust in August 2008 would have written a different decade.
Elon Musk
OpenAI cites distrust of SpaceX in decision to drop Cursor partnership
OpenAI will cut SpaceX-owned Cursor’s model access in November, citing Musk’s history of broken contracts.
OpenAI, the company behind ChatGPT, announced late Friday that it is ending its partnership with Cursor, cutting off the coding tool’s access to its models on November 12. The move comes two weeks after SpaceX completed its $60 billion acquisition of Cursor’s parent company, Anysphere, folding the popular AI coding assistant into Elon Musk’s growing SpaceXAI division.
In a post on its website, OpenAI said the decision came down to trust, not technology. “We cannot be confident that SpaceX will use our technology within our terms of service, based on our experience with Elon Musk’s companies violating contracts,” the company wrote. OpenAI pointed to two specific incidents: X, now part of SpaceX, allegedly breaking the terms of an existing OpenAI contract after Musk bought Twitter.
That lawsuit is the backdrop for all of this. Musk cofounded OpenAI in 2015, left the board in 2018, and sued Sam Altman and Greg Brockman in 2024, arguing they abandoned the company’s nonprofit mission for profit. A federal jury sided with OpenAI in May, finding Musk waited too long to sue rather than ruling on the merits of his claims. Musk said at the time he would appeal to the Ninth Circuit, calling the outcome a “calendar technicality” rather than a real judgment.
SpaceX’s interest in Cursor predates that verdict by weeks. The company first struck a deal with Cursor in April, securing an option to acquire it for $60 billion or pay $10 billion for joint development work instead. As Teslarati reported at the time, the logic was straightforward: Cursor was paying retail prices to Anthropic and OpenAI, two of its most direct competitors, every time a developer used its product, while SpaceX had idle capacity on its Colossus supercomputer, roughly the equivalent of a million Nvidia H100 GPUs, that Cursor could use to train its own models instead. SpaceX exercised the option in June, days after its own IPO, and the deal closed in mid-August.
Once it closed, Musk moved fast. On an all-hands call with more than 1,000 Cursor employees, he reportedly told staff that SpaceXAI’s Grok was playing catchup in the AI race, unlike Tesla and SpaceX in their own markets, and singled out Anthropic as the company to catch. Cursor CEO Michael Truell now reports directly to Musk inside SpaceXAI.
Losing OpenAI’s models leaves Cursor leaning harder on Anthropic’s Claude, which has its own compute agreement with SpaceX, and on Cursor’s in-house Composer model, the one SpaceX’s compute was supposed to accelerate in the first place. OpenAI framed the November deadline as maximum notice under its contract, and said it wants to “go above and beyond” to help developers through the transition. Whether Anthropic makes the same call is now the open question in AI coding.
Tesla Model Y L gets suspension complaints in over odd issue China
Tesla Cybercab event gains steam ahead of massive launch
