Connect with us

SpaceX

SpaceX’s Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy win $297M in US military launch contracts

Falcon 9 B1054 launched in an expendable configuration with a valuable USAF GPS III satellite, December 2018. (SpaceX)

Published

on

SpaceX and competitor United Launch Alliance (ULA) have been awarded three US military launch contracts apiece with an overall value of $297M (SpaceX) and $442M (ULA). While unconfirmed, this could mark the fourth launch contract awarded to Falcon Heavy in just half a year.

Set to nominally launch between 2021 and 2022, SpaceX received two contracts from the National Reconnaissance Office (NROL-85 and -87) and one from the USAF (AFSPC-44), while ULA received two missions from the USAF (SBIRS-5 and -6) and one from NRO (SILENTBARKER). While the announcement did not specify launch vehicle arrangements, it’s safe to assume that ULA will be flying SBIRS on Atlas V, while SpaceX will likely fly both NROL payloads on Falcon 9.

“SpaceX is proud that the Air Force has chosen our company to support our country’s defense with these critical national security space launches and to continue providing the best value in launch with the proven Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy vehicles.” – SpaceX President & COO Gwynne Shotwell, 02/19/2019

“This is a full and open competition. … At present, ULA is the only launch provider certified for the SILENTBARKER and AFSPC-44 missions. However, it is anticipated that in the near future SpaceX will be launching the Falcon Heavy, which may be capable of meeting the SILENTBARKER and AFSPC-44 requirements.”USAF SMC, 02/02/2018

Advertisement
-

In official comments made in a follow-up to the finalized RFP (requests for proposals) for the launch contracts the US military awarded On Feb. 19, 2019, the USAF Space and Missile Systems Center (SMC) offered some insight into the thought processes going on behind the scenes of the procurement initiative. While almost nothing is known about the payloads themselves, SMC appeared to confirm that SILENTBARKER (believed to be NROL-107) and AFSPC-44 could only be launched on ULA rockets at the time (Feb. 2018), although SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy was also reportedly an option. Provided just a few days before Falcon Heavy’s launch debut, SMC’s tentative inclusion of FH was understandable.

 

For a bit of historical context, SpaceX completed its first NRO mission (NROL-76) in May 2017 for an unknown sum, although safe estimates peg the Falcon 9 launch cost somewhere around $80-100M. SpaceX’s first official USAF EELV mission, the first upgraded GPS III satellite, was completed in December 2018 for around $82M (2016) and won an additional three GPS III launch contracts at an average per-mission value of ~$97M. Each GPS III satellite is estimated to cost no less than $573M, while the last four SBIRS (Space-Based Infrared System) geostationary satellites infamously wound up costing more than $1.7 billion apiece as a consequence of prime contractor Lockheed Martin incurring multiple delays and breaching price targets. SBIRS-5 and -6 were said by a Lockheed Martin executive to likely cost “20% less” than SBIRS 1-4, implying that each spacecraft will carry a price tag of at least $1.4B.

Given the sheer cost of the spacecraft and the Air Force’s stance on the SBIRS constellation being a critical part of ballistic missile early-warning defenses, it’s not particularly surprising that Atlas V was chosen over Falcon 9 or Falcon Heavy, a decision likely made to minimize latent risk – however little.

Falcon 9 B1054 launched in an expendable configuration with a valuable USAF GPS III satellite, December 2018. (SpaceX)

Falcon Heavy – contract #6?

In June 2018, the USAF announced that it had officially certified Falcon Heavy for Air Force missions and awarded SpaceX’s newest launch vehicle a $130M contract to launch its Air Force Space Command-52 spacecraft (AFSPC-52) in 2020. Weighing around 6350 kg (14,000 lbs), Falcon Heavy is tasked with placing the spacecraft into a geostationary transfer orbit of 185 by 35,188 kilometers (115 by 21,900 miles), a mission profile that curiously should be within the performance capabilities of an expendable Falcon 9. If AFSPC-44 is similar to -52, it could be launched by either SpaceX rocket and SMC’s vague $297M award fails to answer any questions thanks to the uncertainty of SpaceX NRO contract pricing. Still, it can be easily determined that SpaceX’s average launch cost ($99M) trounces ULA’s ($147M) by nearly 50%, potentially saving the US government and taxpayer a bit less than $150M.

 

Aside from AFSPC-52 and perhaps AFSPC-44, Falcon Heavy received an additional two commercial contracts from Swedish communications firm Ovzon and US company Viasat in October 2018. Following its February 2018 debut, the rocket’s next two missions (Arabsat 6A and USAF STP-2) are also imminent, with current info pointing to launch targets in March and April 2019, respectively. Combined, Falcon Heavy may now have six solid launch contracts manifested from 2019 to 2021. Meanwhile, NASA and international partners ESA and JAXA (among others) continue to express interest in and work towards the creation of a miniature crewed space station (“Gateway”) in an unusual orbit around the Moon, an aspiration the success of which will heavily depend on affordable commercial launches of a variety of Gateway components and resupply missions, at minimum.

Advertisement
-

If NASA’s Gateway and crewed Moon lander programs survive the United States’ 2020 election cycle, Falcon Heavy could be called into action as early as 2022 and have numerous additional contract opportunities in the 4+ years following. Ultimately, the US military’s Feb. 19 launch awards confirm that the taxpayer continues to reap the benefits of competition SpaceX has reintroduced into the monopolized US launch industry, while also reiterating the health and commercial value of SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy investment.


Check out Teslarati’s newsletters for prompt updates, on-the-ground perspectives, and unique glimpses of SpaceX’s rocket launch and recovery processes!

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

News

NASA taps SpaceX for more astronaut missions as Boeing Starliner remains grounded

NASA just gave SpaceX a $946 million contract for three more astronaut missions through 2030.

Published

on

By

NASA has awarded SpaceX a $946 million contract modification covering three more astronaut missions to the International Space Station, according to an announcement the agency published Friday. The award adds Crew-15, Crew-16, and Crew-17 to SpaceX’s existing Commercial Crew Transportation Capability contract, bringing the agreement’s total value to $5.92 billion across 17 flights.

SpaceX confirmed the award on X, writing that it was excited for Falcon 9 and Dragon to launch NASA’s Crew-15, 16, and 17 missions to the Space Station from Florida. The new missions cover ground, launch, in orbit, and return operations, along with cargo transport and a lifeboat capability while docked at the station, and the period of performance runs through 2030.

The award follows a notice of intent NASA issued in May, when the agency first signaled it would purchase up to six additional post certification missions from SpaceX. Teslarati covered that filing at the time, noting NASA cited technical issues and schedule delays encountered by Boeing as a driving factor. Friday’s contract modification locks in three of those six missions, with the remaining three left open for NASA to award later, potentially to Boeing if Starliner clears certification.

Boeing’s CST-100 Starliner has still not flown an operational crew rotation mission for NASA. The spacecraft’s most recent crewed test flight in 2024 ended without the astronauts returning aboard Starliner, and the company has spent the time since working through thruster problems. SpaceX President Gwynne Shotwell said this week that SpaceX is not retiring Crew Dragon today, for sure, while stopping short of committing to fly it past 2030.

Advertisement
-

Crew-12 is currently docked at the space station, and NASA has said Crew-13 is targeting a launch in the coming weeks. The newly awarded Crew-15 through Crew-17 missions extend SpaceX’s role as NASA’s primary way of getting astronauts to and from orbit well into the back half of the decade, regardless of what happens with Starliner or Starship in the meantime.

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

New drone video shows Tesla’s Optimus Factory reaching a turning point

New drone footage shows Tesla’s dedicated Optimus factory steel frame nearing completion at Giga Texas.

Published

on

By

Tesla’s dedicated Optimus factory at Gigafactory Texas is closing in on a finished steel frame, according to drone footage posted Thursday afternoon by longtime site observer Joe Tegtmeyer. In the video, Tegtmeyer said structural steel assembly is now about five column grids away from reaching the building’s north perimeter beam, putting the primary skeleton in its final stretch roughly six months after Tesla broke ground on the North Campus site in late March.

Tegtmeyer’s footage shows concrete already going in on three upper floors while crews continue laying rebar and pouring grade beam footings at ground level. That kind of parallel work, steel rising at one end of the site while concrete sets at the other, is a scheduling approach Tesla used at the original Giga Texas building and appears to be repeating here to save time before the plant’s targeted 2027 production start.

Teslarati has tracked the building’s progress since Tesla confirmed construction was officially underway in May, when the first steel structure went up on what was then bare, reclaimed land. The facility is part of a more than 5.2 million square foot expansion of Giga Texas’s North Campus that Tesla has said will eventually run nearly the length of the existing vehicle factory, over 4,000 feet, while sitting somewhat narrower. Musk has pegged the long term output target at 10 million Optimus units a year once the line is running at full capacity, a volume that would dwarf the one million unit pilot line Tesla is standing up separately at its Fremont, California factory.

Advertisement
-

Tesla Giga Texas to feature massive Optimus V4 production line

The Texas facility sits alongside another major buildout on the same campus. Terafab, the joint Tesla and SpaceX chip fabrication plant that will eventually supply the silicon running Optimus units in the field. Housing robot assembly and chip production on the same grounds is a deliberate supply chain decision, cutting down on the shipping and lead time that would otherwise sit between the two.

Tesla has not given an updated timeline beyond its previously stated goal of bringing high volume Optimus production online at the site in the summer of 2027. Fremont’s smaller pilot line began mass producing the current Gen 3 robot in January, with that plant expected to build tens of thousands of units this year primarily to generate the real world data Tesla needs to refine the robot’s software before Giga Texas ramps up. Six months of visible construction progress, tracked almost entirely through Tegtmeyer’s recurring drone flights, gives the clearest outside look yet at how seriously Tesla is treating that 2027 deadline.

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court

Tesla and SpaceX sue a small Illinois firm after cease and desist letters over Terafab.

Published

on

By

SpaceX Terafab rendering

Tesla and SpaceX are asking a federal judge to rule that their planned Terafab chip factory does not infringe a small Illinois company’s trademark, a request that arrives only after months of quiet negotiation broke down this summer.

The dispute traces to May 18, when Tesla filed three U.S. trademark applications for “Terafab” and “Tesla Terafab,” covering semiconductor chips and related chip making services. TERA-print LLC, a nanotechnology company that has held a federal trademark for “Tera-Fab” since 2021, responded five days later with a cease and desist letter. According to the lawsuit, first reported by Reuters, TERA-print argued that Tesla and SpaceX’s use of “Terafab” would confuse consumers familiar with its own trademark, which covers a desktop photolithography printer sold to researchers for sensor and bioengineering work.

What stands out in the filing is the timing of TERA-print’s own paperwork. One day before sending that cease and desist letter, on May 22, TERA-print applied to expand its existing registration to cover semiconductor materials, silicon chips, nanoelectronic devices and AI design services, categories it had not previously claimed. Tesla and SpaceX call that filing opportunistic in their complaint, noting it arrived two months after Tesla’s public Terafab announcement and just days after Tesla’s own trademark applications went in.

Elon Musk launches TERAFAB: The $25B Tesla-SpaceXAI chip factory that will rewire the AI industry

By June 10, TERA-print was threatening to sue for federal trademark infringement, false designation of origin and unfair competition, the complaint states. Rather than wait to be sued, Tesla, SpaceX and SpaceXAI met with TERA-print six separate times between June and August trying to resolve the dispute directly. Those talks collapsed, and the companies filed for declaratory judgment this week in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, asking a judge to find that “Terafab” does not infringe TERA-print’s mark before TERA-print can file a claim of its own.

TERA-print isn’t backing down. The company told PCMag it discussed a settlement with Tesla as recently as September 2 and feels misled by what it called Tesla’s professed interest in settling. Its CTO, Andrey Ivankin, said TERA-print holds a Defense Department contract to fabricate semiconductors and partially owns Mattiq Inc., an AI company built on TERA-print’s products, and that the company will vigorously defend its rights.

Advertisement
-

Tesla and SpaceX argue the overlap is superficial. Terafab is planned as a $16.8 billion complex spanning roughly 100 million square feet at the Grimes County site SpaceX confirmed last month, built to produce chips for Optimus robots, Tesla’s AI computing needs and SpaceX’s orbital data center ambitions, a scale and purpose the companies say no reasonable consumer would confuse with a tabletop lab printer. TERA-print’s product line has stayed focused on lithography tools for biological and sensor research since it registered its mark in 2021.

The trademark fight is the second legal dispute tied to the Terafab project in the past week, following a separate SpaceX suit aimed at keeping company records about the facility out of public view, as KBTX reported. Whether construction proceeds under the Terafab name now depends on a federal judge in Austin.

Continue Reading