News
SpaceX expends Falcon 9 booster for the first time in almost three years
For the first time since January 2020, SpaceX has intentionally expended a Falcon 9 booster instead of attempting to recover the rocket at sea or on land.
Weighing around 6.6 tons (~14,600 lb) at liftoff, the rare mission sent Intelsat’s twin Maxar-built Galaxy 31 and 32 communications satellites to a high geostationary transfer orbit (GTO) that will allow them to start operating more quickly than a standard GTO would. To launch such a heavy payload to such a high ‘supersynchronous’ transfer orbit, SpaceX – at Intelsat’s request and for a fee – removed all landing-related hardware from Falcon 9 and did not attempt to recover the first stage.
Instead, the rocket put all the propellant that would have otherwise been saved for recovery into its first and only burn, reaching as high a speed as possible before separating from the second stage. Flying for the 14th time since its March 2019 debut, Falcon 9 booster B1051 didn’t perform a controlled flip or attempt to land on a SpaceX drone ship. It’s more likely that the few-dozen-ton rocket – now drained of propellant – reentered Earth’s atmosphere with no control at a speed of roughly 2.7 kilometers per second (~6000 mph), broke apart when it slammed into that atmospheric ‘wall,’ and crashed into the Atlantic Ocean as a cloud of debris.
Having already flown 13 times before its 14th and final mission, it’s safe to say that booster B1051 earned its permanent retirement as an artificial reef. The mission marked the first time a Falcon 9 booster was intentionally discarded since January 2020, when the first Falcon 9 Block 5 booster – B1046 – was destroyed as part of an intentional In-Flight Abort test of SpaceX’s Crew Dragon spacecraft.
Like B1046, B1051 was another fairly new Falcon 9 Block 5 booster. It’s no coincidence that most of the first five or so boosters have been or will be intentionally expended. B1047 was first in August 2019, followed by B1046 five months later, and B1051 in November 2022. B1048 and B1050 both suffered in-flight anomalies that – while they didn’t impact the success of their primary missions – resulted in failed landing attempts. After B1051’s demise, only B1049 remains. Next Spaceflight reports that SpaceX will also intentionally expend that booster after its 11th launch, which will send the Eutelsat 10B communications satellite to a different geostationary transfer orbit as early as this month..
While SpaceX likely charged its customers a healthy fee to expend B1049 and B1051, the company is likely not complaining about an opportunity to refine its fleet of Falcon boosters. Though no new variant has been officially introduced, SpaceX has learned more about the design over the years, and newer Falcon Block 5 boosters include improvements that make them easier and cheaper to operate and reuse. It’s also added four new Falcon 9 boosters to the fleet in less than a year, easing the burden created by expending two older but flightworthy boosters weeks apart.
Once B1049 is gone, that fleet will still have one unflown Falcon 9 booster, four unflown Falcon Heavy boosters, ten flown Falcon 9 boosters, and four flown Falcon Heavy side boosters – the latter of which can potentially be converted into Falcon 9 boosters during Falcon Heavy lulls. B1051 was the third Falcon 9 booster to complete 14 launches, meaning that SpaceX has gotten so good at routine reusability that it can safely assume that each new Falcon 9 Falcon Heavy side booster can fulfill the roles of more than a dozen expendable boosters.
Ultimately, B1051’s sacrifice left Falcon 9’s expendable upper stage with enough performance to boost Galaxy 31 and 32 into a supersynchronous orbit with an apogee more than 58,400 kilometers (~36,300 miles) above Earth’s surface – almost 1.5 times its circumference. Just last month, two recoverable Falcon 9 boosters helped launch a pair of smaller 4.5-ton (~10,000 lb) satellites to almost identical orbits (~57,500 km vs. ~58,400 km). Expending Falcon 9’s booster thus allowed SpaceX to launch almost 50% more payload to a similar supersynchronous GTO, demonstrating the substantial toll booster reuse incurs on launches to higher orbits.
-
Galaxy 31/32 was SpaceX’s 52nd launch this year and hit a target set by CEO Elon Musk in January. Musk later raised his goal to 60 launches, but SpaceX has managed an average of one Falcon launch every six days for nearly 12 months and has a strong shot at completing another eight launches before the end of the year.
-
SpaceX (NASDAQ: SPCX) reported a beat in revenues and EBITDA in its first earnings call report while also minimizing losses as its business continues to gain momentum.
After its IPO in July, SpaceX saw some tough losses on Wall Street due to a major selloff after a delay in its 13th Starship test flight. The ship launched later that week and completed what was arguably the most successful IFT operation in the Starship program’s history.
Nevertheless, the company is continuing on and reported some encouraging financials while also promoting what appears to be a robust outlook moving forward in its Space, AI, and Connectivity divisions.
SpaceX to report first-ever earnings today: here’s what to expect
Earnings Results
- Revenues: $7.8 billion reported vs. $6.7 billion expected
- Adjusted EBITDA: $3.5 billion vs. $2 billion expected
- Net loss of $541 million, an improvement of $467 million from net loss of $1.0 billion
Additionally, CFO Bret Johnsen had these comments:
“2026 has been a momentous year so far, and the second quarter demonstrated the true power of SpaceX. Revenue growth accelerated across all our business segments and we delivered strong operating leverage, with significant margin expansion led by our new AI compute agreements. Our unparalleled leadership in launch, Starlink subscriber growth, new enterprise and government partnerships, and best-in-class AI infrastructure underscore our ability to drive meaningful scale and deliver attractive returns. As a newly public company, we are delighted to welcome our broad base of shareholders and bondholders. We ended the second quarter with $100 billion of cash, cash equivalents, and marketable securities, and $47.5 billion in backlog. This financial strength gives us substantial capacity to invest in Starship, Starlink Broadband and Mobile satellites, and our AI platform, while maintaining a disciplined long-term capital allocation framework.”
Space Business Highlights
SpaceX shared some of its biggest Space Business Highlights for Q2:
- Space revenues grew 55% sequentially and 29% year-over-year to $962 million, driven by a higher number of large customer launches and a favorable customer shift compared to the prior year
- Total costs and expenses for the Space segment were up by $389 million year-over-year, as we continued to accelerate R&D investments in our Starship program, which we believe will reduce the cost to orbit by 99% or more relative to the historical average, and unlock significant revenue potential across all business segments
- Leading launch provider for the world with 78 launches and 1,041 metric tons of mass to orbit deployed over the six months ended June 30, 2026, primarily allocated to Connectivity for the deployment of our Starlink constellation
- Starship V3 development continued to advance towards full and rapid reusability:
- Completed Starship V3’s first suborbital mission in May, Flight 12, which achieved a successful lift off from our new Starbase pad, a precision landing of Starship’s upper stage, and deployment of modified V2 Starlink satellites
- Subsequent to the second quarter, completed Starship Flight 13 in July, which achieved all flight objectives including deploying 20 production V3 satellites, demonstrating in-space relight of a Raptor engine, and executing the softest ever splashdown of Starship, providing critical views of an intact heatshield
SpaceX will report its earnings today at 4:30 P.M. EDT.
Elon Musk issued a second pointed warning to SpaceX short sellers on Tuesday, just hours before the company was set to release its first quarterly earnings as a publicly traded firm. Responding to a report highlighting elevated short interest, Musk wrote on X: “I try to warn them, but they just double down …”
The comment came as data from S3 Partners showed roughly 95 percent of available SPCX shares to borrow were on loan, translating to about 34 percent short interest as a percentage of the float. The stock has traded under pressure since its record-breaking IPO in June 2026, declining significantly from early peaks.
I try to warn them, but they just double down … 🤷♂️
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) August 4, 2026
This marks the second such message from Musk in under three weeks.
On July 17, amid post-IPO volatility, he stated: “The survival probability of firms who maintain a significant short position in SpaceX over time is very low.” At that time, SPCX had fallen roughly 30 percent from its peak above a $2.6 trillion valuation, with short sellers reportedly realizing gains of about $8.7 billion.
Musk’s warning aligned with optimistic analyses projecting that Starship-driven cost reductions could enable a multi-trillion-dollar space economy through applications such as orbital solar power, asteroid mining, data centers, and Mars-related projects, positioning SpaceX as critical infrastructure.
SpaceX is scheduled to report second-quarter results after the market close later today, followed by a webcast. Analysts anticipate revenue near $6.9 billion, reflecting growth in Starlink, launch services, and AI-related segments. The earnings release precedes a major lockup expiration on August 6 that could free hundreds of millions of insider shares.
Musk has a long track record of confronting short sellers, particularly regarding Tesla, where he has argued that persistent bearish positions underestimate transformative technologies. Critics view his optimism as overly ambitious given near-term stock fluctuations, while supporters see temporary dips as opportunities in a longer-term expansion of the space economy.
As SpaceX opens its books to public scrutiny for the first time, the high short interest and Musk’s repeated cautions set the stage for heightened market attention on the results and management’s commentary.
Tesla’s AI lead Ashok Elluswamy doubled down on the company’s strategy regarding Full Self-Driving’s speed settings, and owners are definitely confused.
Earlier versions of Full Self-Driving allowed owners to set a max speed that the vehicle could travel while operating under the semi-autonomous driver assistance platform. This allowed more customization for the driver, giving them the ability to experience FSD’s robust performance with their own personal preferences.
Speed is massively important for obvious reasons — it’s not only a question of keeping the vehicle occupants comfortable by traveling at a safe speed, but it’s also something that could contribute to a ticket or infraction from law enforcement.
With the release of FSD v14 last year, Tesla removed the ability to set a max speed and instead opted for five Speed Profiles, ranging from “Sloth,” the most conservative, to “Mad Max,” the most aggressive and spirited. These profiles not only control speed, but also how frequently the vehicle will execute passes, perform lane changes, and other contributing factors.
The removal of the Max Speed setting was a major complaint amongst the Tesla community because it left owners scrambling for a way to experience suitable behaviors while traveling at an appropriate speed. Most felt the driving profiles would be a good indicator of the behaviors, while speed would still be left up to the discretion of the driver.
Instead, Tesla’s Speed Profiles determine both, and the constant tinkering of how they behave has been a major bottleneck and point of confusion for both owners and the company. From update to update, the Speed Profiles will change, sometimes more drastically than others. Some owners have complained that the “Standard” profile is too fast, while others have experienced “Mad Max” traveling below the speed limit:
What has happened to Mad Max?
At one point it was going 32 in a 35. Traffic ahead had pulled away considerably https://t.co/bjKvaMVTNX pic.twitter.com/aaZSWmLu5v
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) January 24, 2026
These things change with each update, but the big complaint is that owners are on the hook for any tickets that come from FSD’s infractions; that’s the caveat of the suite being named FSD (Supervised). It ultimately means the driver is responsible, and the automaker has no liability when it comes to speeding tickets or general traffic infractions.
It is the driver’s responsibility to take over or adjust based on this.
Elluswamy essentially confirmed that there are no plans to bring back Max Speed control, because it is what he referred to as “an anti pattern.” He then echoed something that CEO Elon Musk has started to really push with FSD, and that’s the idea that Tesla is really honing in on the preferences of the driver.
Max speed control is an anti pattern.
We are working on better learning of user’s implied preferences.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) August 3, 2026
Owners were confused by Tesla’s decision, stating that there must be a better way, especially considering disengagements for incorrect speeds are common:
This…. is not the way
— Kyle Conner (@itskyleconner) August 4, 2026
😭 I appreciate this mentality ! But currently the no.1 reason I disengage in Australia is incorrect speed zones.
— Ryan’s Model Y (@ryanjaycowan) August 3, 2026
This is fine but you need to start accepting liability for speeding tickets then. https://t.co/lyCgdA83gQ
— Jeremy Judkins (@jeremyjudkins_) August 4, 2026
Okay https://t.co/nOvoXQkNg1 pic.twitter.com/jGRtF2xtox
— Chad Moran (@ChadMoran) August 3, 2026
From personal experience and using FSD for over 72 percent of my driving miles since v14 was released late last year, I make Speed Profile adjustments constantly. If FSD is traveling a tad too quickly, I will scale it back, and if it’s too conservative, I’ll make it more aggressive.
I don’t complain about making the Speed Profile changes too frequently, but it would certainly be nice to have it happen less frequently. There are far too many times I am concerned about getting a ticket, even in Standard mode.
The biggest issue for me, personally, which seems to be echoed throughout the community, is the fact that Tesla’s goal is to minimize disengagements. Many drivers are stating that speed is a major reason for disengagements.
However, Tesla is not willing to bring back this one level of input because it would technically be a regression.
Whether it’s right or wrong in your opinion, it is what Tesla is going with, and it seems like it has pivoted quite a bit from its other strategies for minimizing interventions by pushing its AI to behave in a way that would fit the occupant’s personal preferences.
SpaceX reports beat in first earnings while minimizing losses
Elon Musk sends second warning to SpaceX shorts ahead of first earnings
