SpaceX
SpaceX plans Falcon 9 satellite launch from Pad 39A prior to Crew Dragon, Falcon Heavy
SpaceX plans to launch one final commercial Falcon 9 mission from Pad 39A before much of the historic facility’s availability is taken over Crew Dragon and Falcon Heavy launch needs, perhaps as soon as December 2018.
The reason for the decision to launch a routine Falcon 9 mission from 39A – while Launch Complex-40 (LC-40) is (presumably) perfectly available – is unknown, but it can likely be pinned down to launch schedule assurance and pad shakedowns ahead of the flight debut of Crew Dragon, NET January 2019.
SpaceX Falcon 9 launch with Es’hail-2 has turned up on the Eastern Range as NET November 14. This launch will take place from 39A. Cool photo from Nathan Barker (@NASA_Nerd) from this week below:
Range shows this is an ASDS landing for the booster.
As always, subject to change. pic.twitter.com/yydKuOVXrP
— NSF – NASASpaceflight.com (@NASASpaceflight) October 17, 2018
Dragons’ rule
Ultimately, the decision to move the launch of commercial communications satellite Es’Hail-2 to Pad 39A likely boils down to a desire to preserve the delay-sensitive CRS-16 Cargo Dragon launch (NET November 27) while also acting as a sort of ad-hoc shakedown for the pad. 39A has undergone a large number of Crew Dragon-related modifications – some visible but most not – and will have been dormant (at least launch-wise) since Falcon 9 Block 5’s debut six months prior.
Whether or not it’s truly needed, another Falcon 9 launch from the pad will presumably allow SpaceX to work out any new kinks in 39A’s updated ground support infrastructure and perhaps refamiliarize the company’s East Coast launch crew after half a year focused on LC-40 operations. Es’Hail-2 is a ~3000 kg (~6600 lb) geostationary communications satellite to be operated by Qatari company Es’hailSat once it arrives at its final operational orbit.
Despite a recent presentation from SpaceX VP of Reliability Hans Koenigsmann stating that Falcon 9 is capable of returning to launch site (RTLS; i.e. a Landing Zone recovery) while still placing 3500 kg into a geostationary transfer orbit (GTO), SpaceX has filed this launch as an ASDS (autonomous spaceport drone ship) recovery, meaning that it will land aboard Of Course I Still Love You (OCISLY) shortly after launch. Delayed from August 2018, SpaceX may be trying to partially make up for that slip by placing Es’Hail-2 sat in as high of a transfer orbit as possible, potentially cutting weeks or even months off of the time required for the satellite to climb uphill to its operational orbit.
- A welcome update to SpaceX’s Falcon 9 and Heavy performance with and without booster recovery. (SpaceX)
- SpaceX’s most recent Florida launch was in early September. (Tom Cross)
An East Coast lull
Unusual for SpaceX in an otherwise meteoric year filled with numerous major ‘firsts’ and the company’s most productive launch cadence yet, there will be a two-month lull in launches from the East Coast between Telstar 18V (September 10) and Es’Hail-2 (NET November 14), interrupted only by the spectacular October 7 launch of SAOCOM 1A in California. Barring any additional issues, SpaceX will likely crest its 2017 launch record (18 missions) by 3 or 4 missions, not quite the 25-30 launches much of the company’s leadership was probably hoping for, but still an extremely impressive number.
Despite the fact that launch delays are never pleasant (much like if Christmas were pushed back weeks or months to wait for sleigh and present availability), the willingness to significantly delay launches or fall short of targets (assuming payload availability has not been the long pole) is actually a very good thing. Within reason, inconvenient delays tend to serve as evidence that SpaceX is not succumbing to quite the same level of “Go fever” and manager/engineer/technician disconnection that has arguably been responsible for a huge number of launch failures, particularly for NASA’s Space Shuttle.
- SpaceX has already launched 17 successful missions in 2018, one shy of 2017’s record.
- Plenty of landings, too…
- The second Block 5 booster, B1047, debuted at LC-40 on July 21. (Tom Cross)
Best described as the point at which non-technical pressures to launch (cost-saving, internal and external politics, general face-saving) far outweigh the voices of the engineers and technicians responsible for reliably designing, building, and launching rockets, “Go fever” is demonstrably one of the worst things that can occur in spaceflight-oriented organizations, where the consequences of even the tiniest failures can often be amplified into total mission and vehicle failures and even the death of employees or astronauts. It may be unpleasant as an unaffiliated follower or fan and is likely far less pleasant still as an employee or manager, but it is undeniably preferable to succeed after weeks or months of delays than to fail catastrophically while staying on schedule.
Speaking of schedules, Es’Hail-2 (39A) is NET Nov. 14, followed by SSO-A (SLC-4E, Vandenberg) NET Nov. 19 and SpaceX’s 16th operational ISS resupply mission – CRS-16 – on Nov. 27th from Pad 40. Heading into the last month of 2018, SpaceX will launch the first of a fleet of new GPS III satellites for the USAF (NET Dec. 15) and finish off the year with a Vandenberg buzzer-beater, the eighth and final Iridium NEXT launch, NET Dec. 30.
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!
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
SpaceX would not exist if this crucial early launch failed, Musk says
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.




