NASA has certified SpaceX’s Falcon 9 (likely F9 v1.2) to launch the space agency’s most valuable and critical scientific spacecraft, opening up the floor for SpaceX to routinely compete for missions comparable to Hubble Space Telescope, the Curiosity Mars rover (Mars Science Laboratory), Cassini (a Saturn orbiter), and James Webb Space Telescope, among many others.
As SpaceX nears the Falcon family’s 35th consecutive launch success, this certification serves as a pragmatic endorsement of the years of work the company has put into optimizing Falcon 9 for performance and reliability.
SpaceX announces that NASA’s Launch Services Program has given Category 3 certification to the Falcon 9, making it eligible for “NASA’s highest cost and most complex scientific missions,” according to its statement.
— Jeff Foust (@jeff_foust) November 8, 2018
Although Falcon 9 is capable of extremely impressive performance beyond Earth orbit, that performance only becomes truly competitive with ULA’s Atlas V rocket when Falcon 9 is launched as a fully expendable vehicle. Regardless, both Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy are all but guaranteed to cost far less than a comparably capable Atlas V, even assuming no recovery attempt is made. Given the rarity of such valuable NASA launches, typically no more than two annually at best, SpaceX would undoubtedly be more than happy to expend as much hardware as necessary to give NASA a competitive offer for the performance it needs.
“LSP Category 3 certification is a major achievement for the Falcon 9 team and represents another key milestone in our close partnership with NASA. We are honored to have the opportunity to provide cost-effective and reliable launch services to the country’s most critical scientific payloads.” – Gwynne Shotwell, COO and President of SpaceX
Still, the fact remains that most – if not all – of NASA’s high-value “Class A or B” missions end up being extremely heavy spacecraft, either as a result of large and expensive scientific instruments, a need for lots of extra onboard propellant, or some combination of the two. Saturnian orbiter Cassini, launched in 1997, weighed a full ~5700 kg (~12,600 lbs) and had to make its way from Earth to Saturn, a journey of many hundreds of millions of miles. Hubble, placed in a medium Earth orbit, weighed 11,100 kg (24,500 lbs) at liftoff. The Curiosity rover – including cruise stage, reentry hardware, and rocket crane – weighed ~3900 kg (~8600 lbs) at launch.
-
- NASA LSP’s launch vehicle classification.
-
- The corresponding spacecraft classifications, ranging from low-value to high-value.
-
- Falcon Heavy’s first static fire, Feb. 2018. (SpaceX)
-
- SpaceX and NASA’s most recent science spacecraft launch, TESS. (SpaceX)
Paving the way for Falcon Heavy
Falcon 9 routinely launches payloads as heavy as that but only to comparatively low-energy orbits around Earth – to launch the same massive payloads beyond Earth orbit requires far more energy and thus rocket performance. Perhaps the most encouraging part of this NASA certification is the demonstration that NASA’s trust in SpaceX rockets has grown to the point that Falcon Heavy certification is likely just a matter of time. In order to qualify for “LSP Category 3” certification, any given rocket must launch anywhere from 3-6 times depending on what the certification board feels is necessary.
SpaceX has at least two Falcon Heavy launches scheduled for 2019. Combined with the rocket’s nearly flawless February 2018 launch debut, those two launches – commsat Arabsat 6A and the Air Force’s STP-2 mission – could satisfy NASA LSP and allow the agency to certify Falcon Heavy for flagship science missions. If/when that occurs, SpaceX will be able to offer NASA all the performance they will conceivably need for the foreseeable future, ensuring that NASA will be able to compete most future launch contracts. At worst, a ULA victory would force the company to significantly lower their prices.
For prompt updates, on-the-ground perspectives, and unique glimpses of SpaceX’s rocket recovery fleet check out our brand new LaunchPad and LandingZone newsletters!
Elon Musk
Tesla to appeal jury verdict that held it partially liable for fatal crash
Tesla will appeal the decision from the eight-person jury.
Tesla will appeal a recent jury verdict that held it partially liable for a fatal crash that occurred in Key Largo, Florida, in 2019.
An eight-person jury ruled that Tesla’s driver assistance technology was at least partially to blame for a crash when a vehicle driven by George McGee went off the road and hit a couple, killing a 22-year-old and injuring the other.
The jury found that Tesla’s tech was found to enable McGee to take his eyes off the road, despite the company warning drivers and vehicle operators that its systems are not a replacement for a human driver.
The company states on its website and Owner’s Manual that Autopilot and Full Self-Driving are not fully autonomous, and that drivers must be ready to take over in case of an emergency. Its website says:
“Autopilot is a driver assistance system that is intended to be used only with a fully attentive driver. It does not turn a Tesla into a fully autonomous vehicle.
Before enabling Autopilot, you must agree to ‘keep your hands on the steering wheel at all times’ and to always ‘maintain control and responsibility for your vehicle.’ Once engaged, Autopilot will also deliver an escalating series of visual and audio warnings, reminding you to place your hands on the wheel if insufficient torque is applied or your vehicle otherwise detects you may not be attentive enough to the road ahead. If you repeatedly ignore these warnings, you will be locked out from using Autopilot during that trip.
You can override any of Autopilot’s features at any time by steering or applying the accelerator at any time.”
Despite this, and the fact that McGee admitted to “fishing for his phone” after it fell, Tesla was ordered to pay hundreds of millions in damages.
Tesla attorney Joel Smith said in court (via Washington Post):
“He said he was fishing for his phone. It’s a fact. That happens in any car. That isolates the cause. The cause is he dropped his cell phone.”
In total, Tesla is responsible for $324 million in payouts: $200 million in punitive damages, $35 million to the deceased’s mother, $24 million to their father, and $70 million to their boyfriend, who was also struck but was injured and not killed.
The family of the deceased, Naibel Benavides Leon, also sued the driver and reached a settlement out of court. The family opened the federal suit against Tesla in 2024, alleging that Tesla was to blame because it operated its technology on a road “it was not designed for,” the report states.
Despite the disclosures and warnings Tesla lists in numerous places to its drivers and users of both Autopilot and Full Self-Driving, as well as all of its active safety features, the operator remains responsible for paying attention.
CEO Elon Musk confirmed it would appeal the jury’s decision:
We will
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) August 1, 2025
The driver being distracted is a big part of this case that seemed to be forgotten as the jury came to its decision. Tesla’s disclosures and warnings, as well as McGee’s admission of being distracted, seem to be enough to take any responsibility off the company.
The appeal process will potentially shed more light on this, especially as this will be a main point of emphasis for Tesla’s defense team.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk echoes worries over Tesla control against activist shareholders
Elon Musk has spoken on several occasions of the “activist shareholders” who threaten his role at Tesla.
Elon Musk continues to raise concerns over his control of Tesla as its CEO and one of its founders, as activist shareholders seem to be a viable threat to the company in his eyes.
Musk has voiced concerns over voting control of Tesla and the possibility of him being ousted by shareholders who do not necessarily have the company’s future in mind. Instead, they could be looking to oust Musk because of his political beliefs or because of his vast wealth.
We saw an example of that as shareholders voted on two separate occasions to award Musk a 2018 compensation package that was earned as Tesla met various growth goals through the CEO’s leadership.
Despite shareholders voting to award Musk with the compensation package on two separate occasions, once in 2018 and again in 2024, Delaware Chancery Court Judge Kathaleen McCormick denied the CEO the money both times. At one time, she called it an “unfathomable sum.”
Musk’s current stake in Tesla stands at 12.8 percent, but he has an option to purchase 304 million shares, which, if exercised, after taxes, he says, would bump his voting control up about 4 percent.
However, this is not enough of a stake in the company, as he believes a roughly 25 percent ownership stake would be enough “to be influential, but not so much that I can’t be overturned,” he said in January 2024.
I am uncomfortable growing Tesla to be a leader in AI & robotics without having ~25% voting control. Enough to be influential, but not so much that I can’t be overturned.
Unless that is the case, I would prefer to build products outside of Tesla. You don’t seem to understand…
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 15, 2024
Musk’s concerns were echoed in another X post from Thursday, where he confirmed he has no current personal loans against Tesla stock, and he reiterated his concerns of being ousted from the company by those he has referred to in the past as “activist shareholders.”
The CEO said during the company’s earnings call in late July:
“That is a major concern for me, as I’ve mentioned in the past. I hope that is addressed at the upcoming shareholders’ meeting. But, yeah, it is a big deal. I want to find that I’ve got so little control that I can easily be ousted by activist shareholders after having built this army of humanoid robots. I think my control over Tesla, Inc. should be enough to ensure that it goes in a good direction, but not so much control that I can’t be thrown out if I go crazy.”
The X post from Thursday said:
Just fyi I don’t have personal loans at this time against Tesla stock.
Also, the taxes on the options are ~45%, so net gain in voting control is more like 4%.
It is worrying in that I don’t want to build millions of robots and then potentially be ousted by activists and…
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 31, 2025
There is a concern that Musk could eventually put his money where his mouth is, and if politicians and judges are able to limit his ownership stake as they’ve been able to do with his pay package, he could eventually leave the company.
The company’s shareholders voted overwhelmingly to approve Musk’s pay package. A vast majority of those who voted to get Musk paid still want him to be running Tesla’s day-to-day operations. Without his guidance, the company could face a major restructuring and would have a vastly new look and thesis.
News
People are already finding value in Tesla Robotaxi services
Tesla initially launched its Robotaxi service in Austin, though the company more recently launched it in the Bay Area.
Tesla’s Robotaxi service is still in its earliest days, but some consumers are already finding surprising value in the autonomous ride-hailing system.
This was hinted at in recent comments on social media platform X.
Robotaxi Ramp
Tesla initially launched its Robotaxi service in Austin, though the company more recently launched it in the Bay Area. Tesla’s geofence for its Robotaxi service in the Bay Area is massive, covering several times the area that is currently serviced by rival Waymo.
As noted by the EV community members on social media, going end-to-end in Tesla’s Bay Area geofence would likely take over an hour’s worth of driving. That’s an impressive launch for the Robotaxi service in California, and considering Tesla’s momentum, its California geofence will likely grow substantially in the coming months.
Secret Advantage
As noted by Tesla owner and photographer @billykyle, the Tesla Robotaxi service actually has key advantages for people who travel a lot for their work. As per the Tesla owner, using a Robotaxi service would give back so much of his time considering that he gets about 5-7 shoots per day at times.
“I’ve been reflecting on how much of a game changer this is. As a photographer that runs my own business, servicing clients all around the Philadelphia area, I could ditch having a car and let an autonomous vehicle drive me between my 5-7 shoots I have per day. This would give me so much time back to work and message clients,” the photographer wrote in a post on X.
The Tesla owner also noted that the Robotaxi service could also solve issues with parking, as it could be tricky in cities. The Robotaxi service’s driverless nature also avoids the issue of rude and incompetent ride-hailing drivers, which are unfortunately prevalent in services such as Uber and Lyft. Ultimately, just like Unsupervised FSD, Tesla’s Robotaxi service has the potential to reclaim time for consumers. And as anyone in the business sphere would attest, time is ultimately money.
Tesla to appeal jury verdict that held it partially liable for fatal crash
Elon Musk echoes worries over Tesla control against activist shareholders
People are already finding value in Tesla Robotaxi services
-
Elon Musk2 weeks agoElon Musk gives key update on plans for Tesla Diner outside of LA
-
News5 days agoTesla hints a smaller pickup truck could be on the way
-
Elon Musk2 weeks agoElon Musk confirms awesome new features at Tesla Diner Supercharger
-
Investor's Corner1 week agoLIVE BLOG: Tesla (TSLA) Q2 2025 earnings call updates
-
Investor's Corner2 weeks agoTesla ‘Model Q’ gets bold prediction from Deutsche Bank that investors will love
-
Elon Musk2 weeks agoElon Musk’s Neuralink posts massive update with new milestone
-
Elon Musk2 weeks agoTesla preps to expand Robotaxi geofence once again, answering Waymo
-
Elon Musk2 weeks agoTesla Supercharger Diner officially opens: menu, prices, features, and more