Connect with us

SpaceX

SpaceX plans Falcon 9 satellite launch from Pad 39A prior to Crew Dragon, Falcon Heavy

(SpaceX)

Published

on

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.

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.

Advertisement

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.

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.

 

Advertisement

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!

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement

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

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement
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.

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

SpaceX is launching a secret spacecraft that could change how things are made in space

SpaceX’s secret disk-shaped Starfall capsule is targeting a market no reentry vehicle has cracked.

Published

on

By

SpaceX is targeting Tuesday, June 23 for the first flight of Starfall, a reentry capsule the company has developed almost entirely in private. The Falcon 9 launch window opens at 6:43 a.m. ET from Space Launch Complex 40 at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, with a backup window available the same time on June 24. SpaceX has made no public announcement about the vehicle, only providing launch details. Everything known about it has come through FAA and FCC regulatory filings.

What makes Starfall different starts with its shape. Rather than the traditional cone used by Dragon and every other cargo return capsule in operation, Starfall is a flat disk that measures roughly  10.2 feet (3.1 meters) wide and just 2.5 feet (0.75 meters) tall, and weighing 4,630 pounds (2,100 kg) and capable of returning up to 2,200 pounds (1,000 kilograms) of payload from orbit. The disk geometry maximizes structural efficiency and payload volume relative to mass, and the heat shield mechanically jettisons just before splashdown, allowing recovery teams to retrieve both the capsule and the shield separately from the Pacific Ocean.

The difference with Starfall from existing competitors, such as Varda Space Industries, which has largely built the orbital manufacturing market and returns heavy payloads per flight is that Starfall’s specification is roughly 30 times more per mission, and is designed to be mass-produced and launched on either Falcon 9 or Starship. That combination of volume and launch access is something no standalone startup can replicate, and it puts SpaceX in direct competition with the companies that currently pay it to reach orbit.

SpaceX to launch military missile tracking satellites through new Space Force contract

Advertisement

The intended market is orbital manufacturing: pharmaceuticals, protein crystals, semiconductors, and advanced optical fiber that physically cannot be produced in the presence of gravity. FAA documents describe Starfall’s long-term purpose as building a “self-sustaining commercial in-space manufacturing market” and as a potential successor to the industrial capabilities of the International Space Station, which is set to retire in the late 2020s. Military rapid global cargo delivery is a parallel application under active discussion with the Pentagon.

The reason some industries seek manufacturing in space comes down to gravity. On Earth, gravity causes materials to settle, separate, and deform during production. In microgravity, those constraints disappear.

SpaceX’s already controls launch access, which means it currently functions as the landlord for every competitor in the orbital manufacturing return space. Starfall converts that landlord position into vertical ownership, and it would no longer just carry other companies’ capsules to orbit, but rather operate the capsule, own the return logistics, and capture the service revenue directly. Viewed alongside Starlink, Colossus, and the xAI merger, Starfall fits a consistent pattern: SpaceX identifying infrastructure layers that others depend on and moving to own them outright. Orbital manufacturing return is the next layer on that list.

If Tuesday’s reentry, parachute sequence, and recovery demonstration goes as planned, the second FAA-approved test flight follows. A successful pair of demos would position SpaceX to begin offering Starfall as a commercial service, likely first to pharmaceutical and materials science customers before scaling toward the military and broader manufacturing segments.

Advertisement
Continue Reading