News
SpaceX’s attempts to buy bigger Falcon fairings complicated by contractor’s ULA relationship
According to a report from SpaceNews, SpaceX recently approached global aerospace supplier RUAG with the intention of procuring a new, larger payload fairing for its Falcon 9 and Heavy rockets.
RUAG is a prolific supplier of rocket fairings, spacecraft deployment mechanisms, and other miscellaneous subassemblies and components, and US company United Launch Alliance (ULA) has relied on RUAG for fairings and various other composites work for its Atlas V, Delta IV, and (soon) Vulcan launch vehicles. According to SpaceNews, that close relationship with ULA forced RUAG to turn SpaceX away, owing to ULA’s argument that the specific fairing technology SpaceX was pursuing is ULA’s intellectual property. The ramifications of this development are not earthshaking but they’re still worth exploring.
Update: A more recent report by SpaceNews seemingly revealed that RUAG has no such exclusivity or IP agreement with ULA. Nevertheless, it’s worth noting that the reality is probably somewhere in between RUAG’s official statement and the more incendiary information that preceded it. As a commercial entity, RUAG is in no way obligated to supply hardware or services to any prospective buyer, and the political and economic ties between ULA and RUAG are likely more influential than public statements will ever acknowledge.
“In a June 12 letter to Smith, the company’s CEO Peter Guggenbach makes the case that legislation forcing access to suppliers is unnecessary in this case because RUAG does not have an exclusive arrangement with ULA and is willing to work with SpaceX or any other launch providers.
“For this competition, we are in the process of submitting or have submitted proposals to multiple prime contractors regarding launch vehicle fairings. In those agreements, we share technical data to support a prime contractor’s bid while protecting our intellectual property.”
RUAG vice president Karl Jensen told SpaceNews the company has a “significant partnership” with ULA but is looking to work with others too. “We have an offer to SpaceX,” he said. “We don’t know if they’ll accept it.”
SpaceNews, 06/13/2019
Additionally, it’s likely that SpaceX is interested in procuring a few RUAG fairings not for the 5.4m diameter – the actual usable diameter is almost the same as Falcon 9’s own fairing – but for the added height, up to ~16.5m compared to F9’s ~11m.
Stay ahead of the curve and be the first to learn about new industry trends each week!
Follow along as our team gives you their take on the biggest stories of the week.New fairing needed
According to rules behind the latest phase of the US Air Force military launch competition (LSA Phase 2), competitors – likely to include ULA (Vulcan), Blue Origin (New Glenn), Northrop Grumman (Omega), and SpaceX (Falcon 9/Heavy) – will have to offer a larger, 5.4-meter (17 ft) diameter payload fairing to compete for any of the several dozen launch contracts up for grabs.
SpaceX’s Falcon 9 and Heavy rockets were designed with a 5.2m-diameter fairing that flew on the very first Falcon 9 launch and continues to be SpaceX’s only fairing today, albeit with several major modifications and upgrades since its 2010 debut. Blue Origin plans to jump straight into 7m-diameter fairing development for its large New Glenn launch vehicle, expected to launch for the first time no earlier than (NET) 2021.
Procured from RUAG, ULA has several fairing options, including its largest, a 5.4m-diameter fairing that flies on Atlas V 500-series vehicles and also flies on Arianespace’s Ariane 5. Northrop Grumman’s (formerly Orbital ATK’s) Omega will feature a 5.25m-diameter fairing if the rocket makes it to flight hardware production.
Although most of the two-dozen or so satellites to be launched as part of LSA Phase 2 are likely small enough to fit Falcon’s 5.2m fairing and Omega’s 5.25m fairing, SpaceX (and Northrop Grumman) would presumably miss out on opportunities to launch those larger (and likely higher-profile) satellites, effectively handing the contracts to Blue Origin or ULA. SpaceX is thus faced with a conundrum that has three possible solutions.
- Build a brand new fairing with a significantly larger diameter (5.4m+) and be forced to buy tens of millions of dollars of custom tooling and new manufacturing space for a handful of rare launches with a rocket family meant to be made redundant by Starship/Super Heavy.
- Buy a handful of 5.4m-diameter fairings from RUAG, the only practical commercial source on Earth.
- Forgo the ability to compete for the few launches that require a larger fairing.
With #2 reportedly removed by ULA’s interference for dubious reasons, the the remaining options are unsavory at best. It’s possible that SpaceX will willingly design, build and certify an entirely new Falcon fairing for US military launches, but the expense of that process – likely $50M-$100M or more – means that it would probably be contingent upon SpaceX receiving the $500M it has recently begun lobbying for.
For reference, all three of the launch providers SpaceX is competing against – ULA, NGIS, and Blue Origin – were respectively awarded ~$970M, ~$790M, and $500M by the US Air Force to complete the development of their respective launch vehicles. SpaceX can technically compete in the ~30 launch contract competition to follow, but the company wouldn’t receive a penny of development funding to meet the same requirements its competitors are being paid hundreds of millions of dollars for. In lieu of this undeniable imbalance, SpaceX – via Congressman Adam Smith – secured language in the FY2020 National Defense Authorization Act that would provide the company $500M (equivalent to Blue Origin’s award) if they win one of Phase 2’s two block-buy contracts.
Despite the fact that the USAF has plans to spend more than $2B assisting the development of three new rockets, LSA Phase 2 procurement has been inexplicably structured in such a way that only two companies/rockets can win, with one receiving 60% of contracts and the other receiving 40%. In other words, with that baffling award structure and under the assumption that SpaceX wins one of the slots, two of the three rockets the USAF is throwing money at will either die on the drawing board (Omega) or have a significantly lower chance of achieving military launch certification (New Glenn).
Ultimately, it’s clear that building an entirely new fairing would be valuable for SpaceX, even if it might be extremely expensive and of dubious strategic merit alongside the simultaneously development of Starship/Super Heavy, a vehicle that will feature a reusable 9m-diameter payload bay. Whether or not SpaceX bites that particular bullet, the LSA Phase 2 competition remains as baffling and fascinating as ever.
Elon Musk
SpaceX just filed for the IPO everyone was waiting for
SpaceX filed its public S-1, revealing $18.7 billion in revenue and billions in losses.
SpaceX publicly filed its S-1 registration statement with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 20, 2026, making its financial details available to the public for the first time ahead of what could be the largest IPO in history.
An S-1 is the formal document a company must submit to the SEC before going public. It includes audited financials, risk factors, business descriptions, and how the company plans to use the money it raises. Companies are required to file one before selling shares to the public, and it must be published at least 15 days before the investor roadshow begins. SpaceX had already submitted a confidential draft to the SEC in April, which allowed regulators to review the filing privately before it went public.
The S-1 reveals that SpaceX generated $18.7 billion in consolidated revenue in 2025, driven largely by its Starlink satellite internet division, which posted $11.4 billion in revenue, growing nearly 50% year over year. Despite that growth, the company lost about $4.9 billion in 2025 and has burned through more than $37 billion since its founding.
SpaceX just forced Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile to team up for the first time in history
A significant portion of those losses trace back to xAI, Elon Musk’s artificial intelligence company, which was recently merged into SpaceX. SpaceX directed roughly 60% of its capital spending in 2025 to its AI division, totaling around $20 billion, yet that division lost billions and grew revenue by only about 22%.
SpaceX plans to list its Class A common stock on Nasdaq under the ticker SPCX, with Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, and Bank of America leading the offering. The dual-class share structure means going public will not meaningfully reduce Musk’s control, as Class B shares he holds carry 10 votes per share compared to one vote for public Class A shares.
The company is targeting a raise of around $75 billion at a valuation of roughly $1.75 trillion, which would make it the largest IPO ever. The investor roadshow is reportedly planned for June 5.
Tesla has scaled back driver monitoring to be less naggy with the latest version of the Full Self-Driving (Supervised) suite, which is version 14.3.3.
The latest version is already earning praise from owners, who are reporting that the suite is far less invasive when it comes to keeping drivers from taking their eyes off the road. The first to mention it was notable Tesla community member on X known as Zack, or BLKMDL3.
14.3.3 nags less too https://t.co/IuiWzuYO6O
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) May 18, 2026
Musk confirmed that v14.3.3 was made to nag drivers significantly less, something that Tesla has worked toward in the past and has said with previous versions that it is less likely to push drivers to look ahead, at least after looking away for a few seconds.
This refinement aligns with Tesla’s ongoing push toward unsupervised FSD. The update also brings faster Actual Smart Summon (now up to 8 mph), reliable “Hey Grok” voice commands, richer visualizations, smoother Mad Max acceleration, and an intervention streak counter that rewards consistent use. Reviewers describe the drive as more human-like and confident, with fewer twitches or unnecessary maneuvers.
Musk has repeatedly signaled this direction. In late 2025, he stated that FSD would allow phone use “depending on context of surrounding traffic,” noting safety data would justify relaxing rules so drivers could text in low-risk scenarios like stop-and-go traffic.
We tested this, and even still, the cell phone monitoring really seems to be less active in terms of alerting drivers:
Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.2.1 texting and driving: we tested it
Earlier, ahead of v14, Musk promised the system would “nag the driver much less” once safety metrics improved.
In 2023, he confirmed the steering wheel torque nag would be “gradually reduced, proportionate to improved safety,” shifting reliance to the cabin camera. Subsequent updates like v13.2.9 and v12.4 further loosened monitoring, cracking down on workarounds while easing legitimate distractions.
These steps reflect Tesla’s data-driven approach: FSD’s safety record—reportedly averaging millions of miles per crash—now outpaces human drivers in many scenarios, giving the company confidence to dial back interventions. Reduced nags improve usability and trust, encouraging more drivers to rely on the system rather than disengaging out of frustration.
However, there are certainly still some concerns. In many states, it is illegal to handle a cell phone in any way, requiring the use of hands-free devices. In Pennsylvania, it is illegal to use your cell phone at stop lights, which is definitely a step further than using it while the car is actively in motion.
v14.3.3 represents tangible progress. Making FSD less adversarial and more seamless is definitely a step forward, but drivers need to be aware of the dangers of distracted driving. FSD is extremely capable, but it is in no way fully autonomous, nor does its performance warrant owners to take their attention off the road.
Tesla has officially expanded its Full Self-Driving (FSD) suite in Europe once again, as it will now be offered to customer vehicles in Lithuania, marking a significant milestone as the second European Union country to offer the system.
Tesla confirmed FSD’s rollout in Lithuania this morning:
FSD Supervised now rolling out to Teslas in Lithuania 🇱🇹!
Making European roads safer, one by one pic.twitter.com/Uuj0bNG7pP
— Tesla Europe, Middle East & Africa (@teslaeurope) May 20, 2026
Tesla showed several clips of Full Self-Driving navigation in Lithuania to mark the announcement, while Lithuanian Transport Minister Juras Taminskas highlighted the system’s potential to assist with lane-keeping, speed adjustment, and traffic tasks on longer drives, while emphasizing that drivers must stay alert and ready to intervene.
Just a few weeks ago, Tesla officially entered Europe with Full Self-Driving in the Netherlands. The expansion of FSD on the continent is now officially underway.
Full Self-Driving’s European Journey
Europe has long posed one of the toughest regulatory challenges for Tesla’s autonomy ambitions due to stringent safety standards under the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) framework, particularly UN Regulation 171 for Driver Control Assistance Systems.
The Netherlands’ RDW authority granted the pioneering approval after over 18 months of rigorous testing, including 1.6 million kilometers on European roads and extensive data submissions.
This approval enables mutual recognition across the EU, allowing other member states to adopt it nationally without full re-testing. Lithuania quickly leveraged this mechanism, becoming the second adopter. Tesla positions FSD Supervised as a tool to incrementally improve road safety, with the company claiming it reduces incidents when used properly.
Bottlenecks slowing broader European deployment include fragmented national regulations, varying levels of regulatory skepticism, and requirements for robust driver monitoring. Some EU officials have raised concerns about performance in adverse conditions like icy roads or speeding scenarios, alongside frustrations over Tesla’s public advocacy approach.
Additional hurdles involve data privacy, liability frameworks, and the need for EU-wide harmonization. While countries like Belgium appear to be fast-tracking adoption, larger markets such as Germany, France, and Italy are expected to follow in the coming months, with potential EU-wide progress targeted for later in 2026.
Tesla Full Self-Driving Across the World
As of May, Full Self-Driving (Supervised) is available in approximately ten countries.
In North America, it has been live for years in the United States, Canada, Mexico, and Puerto Rico. Asia-Pacific additions include Australia, New Zealand, and South Korea, while China utilizes what Tesla calls “City Autopilot.” In Europe, the Netherlands and now Lithuania join the list, with more countries mulling the possibility of also approving FSD.
Tesla offers FSD via monthly subscriptions (around €99 in Europe) or one-time purchases (with deadlines approaching in many markets), shifting toward recurring revenue models. Today is the final day Europeans will be able to purchase the suite outright.
This expansion underscores Tesla’s push for global autonomy, starting with supervised and building toward greater capabilities. With Lithuania now online, momentum is building across Europe, though regulatory caution will continue shaping the pace. Owners in approved regions report smoother highway and urban driving, but the system remains Level 2, which requires human oversight.
SpaceX just filed for the IPO everyone was waiting for
Tesla scales back driver monitoring with latest Full Self-Driving release
