Connect with us

News

SpaceX recovery ships head to sea for first 'whole-fairing' catch attempt

One of the first views of twin SpaceX fairing recovery ships Ms. Tree & Ms. Chief. After an aborted November trial, the ships are now officially in place for their first simultaneous catch attempt. (Greg Scott)

Published

on

After a brisk day-long cruise into the Atlantic Ocean, SpaceX’s twin Falcon fairing recovery ships have reached the general landing area to prepare for their first true ‘whole-fairing’ catch attempt.

Formerly known as Mr. Steven, GO Ms. Tree and new sister ship GO Ms. Chief departed Port Canaveral on December 14th and arrived at their designated recovery roughly 36 hours later. Now stationed just shy of 800 km (500 mi) downrange of SpaceX’s LC-40 Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS) launch site, the ships are in position and can begin to prepare for Falcon 9’s Kacific-1/JCSAT-18 launch.

Scheduled to lift off no earlier than (NET) 7:10 pm ET, December 16th (00:10 UTC, Dec 17), Falcon 9 will place the ~6800 kg (15,000 lb) Kacific-1/JCSAT-18 communications satellite in a geostationary transfer orbit (GTO). Falcon 9 booster B1056 will attempt its third landing around nine minutes after launch, to be followed 25 minutes later by satellite deployment from the rocket’s upper stage. deploying the satellite around thirty minutes after launch.

If all goes according to plan, another 12-15 minutes after Falcon 9’s second stage (S2) deploys the Kacific-1/JCSAT-18 satellite, the rocket’s payload fairing halves will begin their final approach towards recovery ships Ms. Tree and Ms. Chief. Just shy of identical twins, the two ships have been outfitted with custom arms, boom supports, and nets with the intention of quite literally catching payload fairing halves out of the air after orbital Falcon 9 (and Heavy) launches.

Advertisement

SpaceX’s fairing recovery development program has had a long and arduous journey from Mr. Steven’s (now Ms. Tree’s) arrival at the company’s Port of Los Angeles dock space (late-2017) to the ship’s first attempted fairing catch (February 2018) and first successful catch (June 2019). In the 20+ months SpaceX has been attempting fairing recoveries, at least a dozen intentional soft ocean landings and seven net catches have been attempted, with numerous successful splashdowns and recoveries ultimately followed by two consecutive catches in June and August 2019.

Ms. Tree’s second successful fairing catch occurred on August 6th, some 45 minutes after Falcon 9 lifted off with the AMOS-17 communications satellite. (SpaceX)
Fairing catcher GO Ms. Chief – the latest addition to SpaceX’s rocket recovery fleet – departed Port Canaveral for sea trials on October 23rd. (Richard Angle – Teslarati)

The fact that SpaceX consecutively caught two fairing halves a little over two months apart after five failed catch attempts suggests that the company has effectively solved the majority of the fairing recovery challenge, becoming the first company (or space agency) in the world to do so. Unfortunately, a three-month launch lull after the second successful catch precluded any rapid-fire follow-up attempts and when that lull came to an end on November 11th, Ms. Tree and Ms. Chief were both ready but were forced to abort the attempt by rough seas.

Both ships actually spent several weeks docked (or stranded) in a North Carolina port after that aborted mission, potentially indicating that SpaceX had to fly a team north to inspect both ships’ arms and ensure that they could make the journey back to Port Canaveral. They were ultimately cleared and returned to their home port around ten days later, where their arms and booms were immediately removed. It’s unclear why that removal occurred but SpaceX’s recovery team rapidly reinstalled their arms in just a few days, followed by their nets soon after.

Given that their first simultaneous (i.e. ‘whole-fairing’) catch attempt was aborted before it could start, it’s safe to say that December 16th’s hopeful attempt will be Ms. Tree’s and Ms. Chief’s first side-by-side recovery mission. Both ships have successfully reached the recovery zone, a step further than they managed to get on their November attempt. Coincidentally, that November launch happened to mark both SpaceX’s and the world’s first launch of a flight-proven payload fairing, both halves of which were recovered from the ocean and represented a more or less worst-case scenario for reuse.

And nevertheless, that reuse was a flawless success, marred only by the fact that Ms. Tree and Ms. Chief were unable to attempt to recover the world’s first twice-flown payload fairing. In short, all the conditions are right for what could be the world’s first successful recovery of both halves of an orbital-class payload fairing. If successful, SpaceX will have effectively closed the book on Falcon 9 and Heavy reusability development, having proven that both boosters and fairings can be reliably and routinely recovered and reused.

Advertisement

Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.

Eric Ralph is Teslarati's senior spaceflight reporter and has been covering the industry in some capacity for almost half a decade, largely spurred in 2016 by a trip to Mexico to watch Elon Musk reveal SpaceX's plans for Mars in person. Aside from spreading interest and excitement about spaceflight far and wide, his primary goal is to cover humanity's ongoing efforts to expand beyond Earth to the Moon, Mars, and elsewhere.

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

SpaceX confirms third massive compute deal at Colossus data center

Published

on

Credit: xAI Memphis

SpaceX confirmed today that it has officially signed its third massive compute deal, providing compute at its Colossus data center in Southaven, Tennessee.

Reflection AI will gain immediate access to NVIDIA GB300 chips at SpaceX’s Colossus 2 data center. In return, Reflection will pay SpaceX $150 million per month starting on July 1, with total payments reaching approximately $6.3 billion if the contract runs through its duration, which is until 2029. Either party can terminate the agreement with 90 days’ notice after the initial three-month period.

CNBC first reported the deal.

This latest partnership highlights SpaceX’s strategy of commercializing its massive Colossus supercomputing infrastructure, originally developed to power Elon Musk’s Grok AI models. The company has rapidly expanded its customer base in the AI sector following its February 2026 merger with xAI, a transaction that valued the combined entity at $1.25 trillion.

SpaceX has previously signed significant compute deals with other major players.

It granted Anthropic exclusive access to the full capacity of its Colossus 1 data center, which exceeds 300 megawatts and includes over 220,000 NVIDIA GPUs. Details from SpaceX’s IPO filings indicate Anthropic will pay $1.25 billion per month through May 2029, potentially generating around $45 billion over the term of the deal.

Additionally, Google agreed to pay SpaceX $920 million per month for compute capacity from October 2026 through June 2029. This 32-month period will provide Google access to roughly 110,000 NVIDIA GPUs, along with supporting processors and memory. Capacity ramps up through September at a reduced fee, with termination options after the first year.

SpaceXA also established arrangements for computing power with Cursor, an AI coding startup. SpaceX acquired them in a $60 billion all-stock deal.

SpaceX makes first acquisition post-IPO

These arrangements position SpaceX’s collective position as an AI infrastructure powerhouse with high-margin revenue potential. The Google deal alone could generate nearly $29.5 billion over its term, while the Reflection contract adds another $6.3 billion.

Combined with the Anthropic arrangement, SpaceX stands to realize tens of billions in revenue from compute leasing in the coming years, which diversifies beyond SpaceX’s traditional rocket launches and Starlink operation.

The deals underscore growing demand for advanced AI training and inference capacity amid chip shortages and surging model development needs. Reflection, valued at $25 billion and focused on “American open intelligence” with government and national security ties, cited recent restrictions on closed models as validation for open-source approaches.

For SpaceX, the partnerships transform capital-intensive data centers into flexible revenue sources while supporting its broader AI ambitions after the company has gone public.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Elon Musk responds to SpaceX’s ESG rating and says its rockets won’t go electric

Published

on

(Credit: SpaceX)

It is safe to say SpaceX won’t be going for electric rockets anytime soon.

In a characteristically blunt reply on X, SpaceX frontman Elon Musk stated, “Unfortunately, electric rockets are impossible,” following reports that MSCI had assigned SpaceX its lowest possible ESG rating of CCC.

The assessment, issued just this past week, coinciding closely with SpaceX’s public market debut, placed the company on par with nations like Russia in sustainability scoring and cited significant risks in environmental, social, and governance areas.

MSCI flagged SpaceX’s exposure to rocket emissions and other operational impacts, alongside governance concerns such as concentrated control by Musk and limited shareholder protections. Musk’s terse comment directly addressed the environmental pillar, underscoring a core physical constraint that ESG frameworks often overlook when evaluating high-thrust industries.

Electric propulsion systems do exist and are widely used in space. Ion thrusters and Hall-effect thrusters accelerate ionized propellant, typically xenon or krypton, using electric fields, achieving very high specific impulse, often exceeding 3,000 seconds compared to roughly 300–450 seconds for chemical rockets.

This efficiency makes them ideal for satellite station-keeping, orbit raising, and deep-space missions where low thrust over long durations is sufficient. SpaceX’s own Starlink satellites employ electric propulsion for these purposes.

However, launching from Earth’s surface demands something entirely different: enormous thrust delivered rapidly to overcome gravity and atmospheric drag. A typical orbital-class booster must generate thrust far exceeding its weight, often in the millions of Newtons within seconds.

Chemical rockets achieve this through exothermic combustion of dense propellants, producing high-mass-flow, high-velocity exhaust. Electric systems, by contrast, expel very small amounts of mass at extremely high speeds. Generating equivalent thrust would require impractical onboard power levels, massive energy storage or generation systems, and prohibitive added mass, rendering the approach infeasible with current or near-term technology.

Musk has previously expressed a similar sentiment, noting a desire for electric orbital rockets while acknowledging the inescapable requirements of Newton’s third law and energy delivery. The distinction is clear: electric propulsion excels once a vehicle is already in space; it cannot replace the high-thrust chemical phase required to reach orbit from the ground.

The episode illustrates broader critiques of ESG ratings. Proponents argue they incentivize better risk management and long-term sustainability. Detractors, including Musk—who has previously called ESG a “scam”—contend that such metrics can penalize essential activities when no practical alternative exists, potentially discouraging innovation in sectors like space access.

Elon Musk dubs the S&P 500 ESG as “outrageous scam” after Tesla gets booted from index

SpaceX has sought to mitigate launch-related impacts through reusability: Falcon 9 boosters have flown more than 30 times in some cases, dramatically lowering the manufacturing and emissions burden per kilogram delivered to orbit. Starship’s design further emphasizes rapid reusability and methane propellant, which can theoretically be produced via sustainable pathways.

Ultimately, Musk’s remark serves as a reminder that certain engineering realities persist regardless of scoring systems. As humanity expands its presence in space for communications, science, and exploration, balancing genuine environmental progress with technological necessity remains a central challenge.

ESG frameworks may evolve, but the fundamental limits of electric launch propulsion are unlikely to change soon.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Tesla just trademarked MEGAPOD: here’s what it is

Published

on

tesla showroom
(Credit: Tesla)

Tesla just trademarked ‘MEGAPOD’ with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), its latest move in what seems to be a hint that the company is incredibly focused on its AI efforts and storage needs as compute increases.

The application carries serial number 99893717 and lists the applicant as Tesla, Inc., located at 1 Tesla Road, Austin, Texas 78725.

The filing remains in ‘live pending’ status, and it is a new application waiting for assignment to an examining attorney. It has not yet been published or registered.

According to the official goods and services description in the application, Tesla describes ‘MEGAPOD’ as:

“Modular data center hardware systems for artificial intelligence computing, comprised of computer servers, computer hardware for artificial intelligence processing, computer networking hardware, electrical power distribution units, and cooling systems, sold as a unit; self-contained modular computing hardware systems for artificial intelligence workloads; integrated computer hardware platforms for artificial intelligence computing, namely, enclosures containing computer hardware, power distribution hardware, and cooling hardware, sold as a unit; downloadable software for monitoring, managing, optimizing, and regulating modular artificial intelligence computing hardware systems.”

This description specifies complete, self-contained modular units that integrate servers and specialized AI processing hardware with networking components, power distribution, and cooling systems. It also includes associated downloadable software for oversight and optimization of these systems. The language emphasizes hardware sold “as a unit” and enclosures that combine the necessary elements for AI computing workloads.

Tesla has an established history of developing and commercializing modular hardware systems. Its Megapack product line, for example, consists of utility-scale battery energy storage systems designed as containerized units for grid applications. The MEGAPOD filing follows a similar pattern of protecting a name for modular, integrated hardware platforms, this time focused on artificial intelligence computing infrastructure.

This could be an early move, especially as Tesla did not have trademark rights to the word ‘Cybercab,’ the name of its self-driving, ride-hailing-focused vehicle.

Trademark applications of this type allow companies to secure priority rights to a name for defined categories of goods and services. The USPTO examines applications for compliance with legal requirements, including distinctiveness and absence of conflicts with prior marks. If the application proceeds successfully through examination, publication, and any opposition period, it could result in a federal trademark registration providing nationwide protection. This is what Tesla’s obvious intention is with ‘MEGAPOD.’

Public reports and analysis suggest MEGAPOD could represent modular, container-style AI computing pods designed for easy deployment. These would bundle servers, AI accelerators, power systems, and cooling into self-contained units suitable for distributed AI workloads. This approach aligns with Tesla’s announced AI compute strategy.

In March 2026, Elon Musk outlined plans for “Digital Optimus” (also referred to as Macrohard), a joint Tesla-xAI project for AI agents capable of handling complex digital tasks. The plans include running these agents on Tesla’s AI4 hardware in parked vehicles as well as dedicated compute units installed at Supercharger stations, which collectively offer substantial unused electrical capacity.

What is Digital Optimus? The new Tesla and xAI project explained

A modular hardware platform like the one described in the ‘MEGAPOD’ filing would support scalable, rapid deployment of such distributed compute resources. It could complement Tesla’s other AI infrastructure efforts, including the Dojo supercomputer used for training models and the development of AI systems for autonomous driving and robotics, by enabling edge or regional AI inference without reliance on traditional centralized data centers.

Continue Reading