SpaceX
SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy eyed by Europe/Japan as ULA nails spectacular Delta Heavy launch
According to RussianSpaceWeb, SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy rocket is under serious consideration for launches of major European and Japanese payloads associated with the Lunar Orbital Platform-Gateway (formerly the Deep Space Gateway).
Currently targeting launch readiness in the mid-2020s, those heavy scientific and exploratory government payloads are eyeing Falcon Heavy at the same time as the United Launch Alliance’s (ULA) Delta IV Heavy – the most powerful operational rocket prior to FH’s debut – is busy wrapping up a scientific launch for NASA and prepping for another launch in September for its singular anchor customer, the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO).
https://twitter.com/_TomCross_/status/1028599075002896384
A breathtaking mission to the sun
United Launch Alliance (ULA) has just completed the ninth successful launch of its Delta IV Heavy rocket, originally developed by Boeing in the 1990s and debuted in 2004 before the company’s launch vehicle subsidiary joined forces with Lockheed Martin’s own rocket branch. Delta Heavy’s August 12th mission saw the rocket send a small NASA payload known as Parker Solar Probe (PSP) on a trajectory that will eventually place the craft closer to the Sun than any human-made object before it. In pursuit of a better understanding of how exactly our solar system’s namesake functions and behaves, PSP will also become the fastest object ever created by humans, traveling at an extraordinary 200 km/s (120 mi/s) at the zenith of its deepest periapses (the point at which PSP is closest to the sun).
In a fitting send-off for the small heat-shielded spacecraft, Delta IV Heavy’s launch was a spectacle to behold, with clear skies and the cover of darkness combining to magnify the best of the rocket’s telltale features. Upon ignition of its three massive RS-68 rocket engines, each producing over 700,000 lb-ft of thrust, the rocket is held down for several seconds in a process that famously culminates in what appears to be self-immolation just before liftoff, a consequence of the rocket burning off excess hydrogen fuel expelled during the ignition process. Unlike Falcon 9’s dirtier kerosene-oxygen combustion, Delta Heavy’s hydrogen and oxygen fuel produce a flame that is nearly transparent, aside from a bright orange tint created by materials in each engine’s ablative (read: designed to disintegrate) nozzle.
-
- Delta IV Heavy opts for ‘medium-well’ just before launch. (Tom Cross)
-
- The extraordinary might of Delta IV Heavy’s hydrolox-burning RS-68A engines, producing a combined 2.1 million pounds of thrust at liftoff. (Tom Cross)
-
- Delta IV Heavy takes to the sky on its tenth launch, with Parker Solar Probe in tow. (Tom Cross)
-
- Delta IV Heavy takes to the sky on its tenth launch, with Parker Solar Probe in tow. (Tom Cross)
While Delta IV Heavy has used one of its other nine successful launches for a NASA payload (a test flight of the Orion capsule), all seven remaining missions were conducted for the USAF (1) and the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO; 6), and all six remaining missions on the rocket’s manifest also happen to be for the NRO. Put simply, Delta IV Heavy would not exist today if the NRO did not have an explicit and unflappable need for the capabilities it offers. The primary downside is cost: DIVH costs at least $350 million and usually more than $400m per launch. Thankfully for ULA, the NRO has very few problems with money, and the agency’s estimated annual budget of $10 billion (2013) is more than half of NASA’s entire budget.
After Falcon Heavy’s successful debut, Delta IV Heavy’s monopoly over heavyweight NRO and USAF payloads is rapidly coming to an end, and both agencies are almost certainly attempting to equally quickly certify SpaceX’s newest rocket for critical national security space (NSS) launches. With that influx of the slightest hint of competition, Delta IV Heavy’s ~$400 million price tag starts to look rather painful in comparison to Falcon Heavy’s cost ceiling of around $150 million, potentially much less in the event that 1-3 of its boosters are recoverable. That competition likely won’t kill Delta IV Heavy, thanks entirely to the anchor support of the NRO, but it most certainly will guarantee that Delta Heavy is retired the moment ULA’s next-gen Vulcan rocket is ready to take over, likely no earlier than 2024.
Outside of the NRO, however, there is a surprising amount of interest in Falcon Heavy for interesting (and heavy) government payloads, particularly with respect to the NASA/ESA/JAXA/Roscosmos cooperative lunar space station, known as the Lunar Orbital Platform-Gateway.
Falcon Heavy enters the mix
The first payload considering Falcon Heavy for launch services is the Japanese Space Agency’s (JAXA) HTV-X, and upgraded version of a spacecraft the country developed to assist in resupplying the International Space Station (ISS). HTV-X is primarily being designed with an ISS-resupply role still at the forefront, but Russianspaceweb recently reported that JAXA is seriously considering the development of a variant of the robotic spacecraft dedicated to resupplying the Lunar Orbital Platform-Gateway (LOPG; and I truly wish I were joking about both the name and acronym).
-
- JAXA’s first-generation HTV spacecraft on its fourth of nine planned launches, 2013. (NASA)
-
- JAXA’s first-generation HTV spacecraft on its fourth of nine planned launches, 2013. (NASA)
-
- The best available visualization of HTV-X, Japan’s upgraded and more affordable ISS resupply spacecraft. (JAXA)
As the name suggests, LOPG is fundamentally a shrunken, upgraded copy of the present-day International Space Station but with its low Earth orbit swapped for an orbit around the Moon. Why, you might ask? It happens that that question is far less sorted at this point than “how”, and there’s a fairly strong argument to be made that NASA is simply attempting to create a low-hanging-fruit destination for the chronically delayed SLS rocket and Orion spacecraft it routinely spends ~20% of its annual budget on. The alternatives to such a crewed orbital outpost are actually landing on the Moon and building a base or dramatically ramping development of foundations needed to enable the first human missions to Mars.
ARTICLE: Cislunar station gets thumbs up, new name in President's budget request – https://t.co/a1XhAPZ7ot
– By Philip Sloss.
(Numerous renders by Nathan Koga, including the epic one below) pic.twitter.com/j0cr2ze7qG
— NSF – NASASpaceflight.com (@NASASpaceflight) March 16, 2018
Regardless of the LOPG’s existential merits, a lot of energy (and money) is currently being funneled into planning and initial hardware development for the lunar station’s various modular segments. JAXA is currently analyzing ways to resupply LOPG and its crew complement with its HTV-X cargo spacecraft, currently targeting its first annual ISS resupply mission by the end of 2021. While JAXA will use its own domestic H-III rocket to launch HTV-X to the ISS, that rocket simply is not powerful enough to place a minimum of ~10,000 kg (22,000 lb) on a trans-lunar insertion (TLI) trajectory. As such, JAXA is examining SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy as a prime (and affordable) option: by recovering both side boosters on SpaceX’s drone ships and sacrificing the rocket’s center core, a 2/3rds-reusable Falcon Heavy should be able to send as much as 20,000 kg to TLI (lunar orbit), according to comments made by CEO Elon Musk.
-
- Falcon Heavy booster ice peeling away and vaporizing in the fire of the engines. (Photo: Tom Cross)
-
- Falcon Heavy’s launch debut from Pad 39A, February 2018. (SpaceX)
-
- Falcon Heavy’s side boosters seconds away from near-simultaneous landings at Landing Zones 1 and 2. (SpaceX)
That impressive performance would also be needed for another LOPG payload, this time for ESA’s 5-6 ton European System Providing Refueling Infrastructure and Telecommunications (ESPRIT) lunar station module. That component is unlikely to reach launch readiness before 2024, but ESA is already considering Falcon Heavy (over its own Ariane 6 rocket) in order to save some of the module’s propellant. Weighing 6 metric tons at most, Falcon Heavy could most likely launch ESPRIT while still recovering all three of its booster stages.
Regardless of the outcomes of those rather far-off launch contracts, it’s clear that some sort of market exists for Falcon Heavy and even more clear that its injection of competition into the stagnant and cornered heavy-lift launch segment is being globally welcomed with open arms.
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!
SpaceX’s Raptor engine family has steadily increased sea-level thrust while simultaneously reducing mass, turning iterative engineering gains into substantially higher performance for the Super Heavy booster. CEO Elon Musk shed more light on how powerful Raptor 4 will be, and it’s pretty crazy.
Raptor 1 delivered 185 metric tons of thrust at roughly 2,080 kilograms, while Raptor 2 raised that to 230 tons while cutting mass to about 1,630 kilograms. SpaceX data for Raptor 3 lists a target of 280 tons at 1,525 kilograms (with further reductions in associated vehicle hardware), while operational flight ratings have been cited near 250 tons.
This morning, Elon Musk stated that Raptor 4 is expected to reach 300 tons of sea-level thrust at roughly the same mass as Raptor 3. Across these versions, thrust has risen by more than 60 percent from the first engines while engine mass has fallen, producing a sharp improvement in thrust-to-weight ratio. This is a true testament to how great SpaceX engineering has been:
🚀 Elon says Raptor 4 will make 300 tons of thrust at sea level at roughly the same mass as Raptor 3.
How far Raptor has come:
Raptor 1: 185 tf, 2,080 kg
Raptor 2: 230 tf, 1,630 kg
Raptor 3: 250 tf, 1,525 kg
Raptor 4: 300 tf33 on Super Heavy = ~9,900 tf, nearly 3x Saturn V https://t.co/HQDswZhyvL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 26, 2026
With 33 engines on SuperHeavy, the jump from earlier versions to a 300-ton Raptor 4 would produce roughly 9,900 metric tons of total liftoff thrust, nearly three times the Saturn V’s approximately 3,400 metric tons from its five F-1 engines.
This is not just a larger number on a data sheet, either, as sea-level thrust is the force available the moment the vehicle leaves the pad. This is when it is heaviest and still deep in Earth’s gravity well and dense atmosphere.
Higher levels of sea-level thrust directly improves the initial thrust-to-weight ratio of the full stack. A higher ratio produces faster acceleration off the pad, which shortens the time the rocket has to spend fighting gravity, and gravity losses during the first minute or two of the flight are a major drain on total available delta-v. Every second shaved off of that early climb preserves more propellant energy for reaching orbital velocity or for carrying extra payload.
Because Super Heavy’s engine count is constrained by vehicle diameter and packing density, increasing thrust per engine is the most straightforward way to raise total liftoff performance without redesigning the booster structure or design.
The same-mass target for Raptor 4 is equally important. Holding engine mass roughly constant while raising thrust improves the engine’s own thrust-to-weight ratio and reduces the structural and propellant mass fraction that must be carried solely to support the engines.
Earlier Raptor iterations also simplified or eliminated extensive vehicle-side hardware such as heat shields. These gains compound: more force for less installed mass leaves additional capacity for propellant, payload, or operational margins such as engine-out capability.
For Starship’s architecture, the practical effects are large. Greater liftoff thrust supports heavier vehicles, larger propellant loads, and higher payloads to low Earth orbit, figures SpaceX has targeted in the 100-plus-ton reusable range. That capacity underpins orbital refueling, lunar missions, and eventual Mars cargo and crew flights.
Continued growth in sea-level thrust therefore tightens the gap between theoretical rocket performance and the high flight rates and reusability needed to make large-scale space transport practical.
Tesla expanded its Robotaxi geofence in Houston, Texas, today, enlarging the service area and drawing a new rocket-shaped boundary across the city’s northwestern and central parts.
Although CEO Elon Musk said it was just a coincidence, the expansion seems to be an ode to SpaceX and its potential merger with Tesla.
🚨 Tesla has just expanded its Robotaxi geofence in Houston
It looks a lot like a rocket — we all remember the shape in Austin 🤣 https://t.co/cFOPEuiJ4u
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 26, 2026
The official Tesla Robotaxi account announced the change with the lines “Houston, we have liftoff” and “Bigger service area now live,” pairing them with a map overlay.
The prior white geofence, roughly 25 square miles covering Jersey Village, Harvest Bend, and the Willowbrook corridor along U.S. 290 and State Highway 249, now sits inside a larger blue zone that stretches southeast toward Bellair and closer to central Houston.
Houston’s Robotaxi service launched on April 18, 2026, the same day as Dallas, as Tesla’s first unsupervised public expansion beyond Austin. From the start, the vehicles were Model Ys running without anyone in the front seats, booked through the dedicated Tesla Robotaxi app and open to the public inside the geofence.
Trackers measured the initial zone at about 25 square miles; by late September it had not grown substantially. Community and registry data indicated a modest local fleet of unsupervised Model Ys, while dozens to nearly 200 Cybercabs, the purpose-built, steering-wheel-free two-seaters, have been spotted staging and testing in Houston lots, though public Cybercab rides remain limited to Austin for now.
Across the broader Robotaxi program, Tesla began public Robotaxi rides in Austin in June 2025, as a small geofence and vehicles with safety monitors became available for a ride-hailing service. Later on, Tesla removed the monitors and steadily expanded the service area until it covered most of the Austin metro area.
Unsupervised Robotaxi services now run in six cities: Austin, Dallas, Houston, Miami, Orlando, and Tampa. Cumulative driverless miles reported by the company have reached several million. The Cybercab entered public service in Austin in early September 2026 and has scaled rapidly there. The company has also said that Dallas is next for Cybercab rides in November, with further cities and 24/7 hours targeted by year-end, plus fleet-operator sales of the vehicle.
Waymo also operates a fully driverless service in Houston, which has been open to the public since August of this year.
The Houston expansion continues Tesla’s pattern of starting with tightly controlled validation zones before widening coverage as real-world data accumulates, while the rocket motif on the map underscores the company’s habit of injecting visual flair into its autonomy rollout.
Riders inside the new boundary can request unsupervised Model Y trips in the Robotaxi app; exact operating hours and further Cybercab availability remain subject to app updates and company statements.
Elon Musk
The Starship moon landing number NASA and Elon Musk can’t agree on
Musk disputes NASA estimate of 22 Starship launches for Moon landing, predicting 6 to 8.
Elon Musk is disputing a new NASA safety panel estimate of how many Starship launches it will take to put astronauts on the Moon, saying the real number will be less than half the panel’s figure.
On Thursday, NASA’s Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel held its quarterly public meeting. Panel member Charlie Precourt, a former NASA astronaut, flagged the fueling process for SpaceX’s lunar lander as a major risk for Artemis IV, the mission planned to land a crew on the Moon in 2028. “We need to keep our eyes on numerous required fuelings for the lander,” Precourt said, according to Ars Technica. “I think the last estimate is around 22 flights.”
Ars Technica’s Eric Berger posted the comment on X, and Musk replied. “That’s way too high,” Musk wrote. “Actual number will be more like 6 to 8.”
The disagreement comes down to a basic problem with sending a ship as large as Starship to the Moon. Starship burns nearly all of its propellant just reaching Earth orbit, so it cannot continue on to the Moon without stopping for a refill. SpaceX’s answer is a gas station in space. First, a Starship that works as a storage tank, called a depot, is launched into orbit. Then a series of tanker Starships launch one at a time, dock with the depot and pump their leftover propellant into it. Once the depot is full, the lunar lander version of Starship launches, docks, fills up and heads for the Moon.
Every tanker trip is its own full rocket launch, which is why the count matters. More launches mean more time, more cost and more chances for something to go wrong before astronauts ever leave Earth. Berger estimated that even if SpaceX reaches twice weekly Starship launches by the end of 2027, filling a depot at the panel’s number would still take roughly three months.
How many tankers are needed depends mostly on how much propellant each one can carry to orbit and how much is lost along the way. Starship’s fuel and oxygen are stored at extremely cold temperatures, and some of it slowly boils off while waiting in orbit. More is lost in each transfer. NASA appears to be working from what Starship can lift today, while Musk’s range assumes a more capable rocket.
Musk has pushed back on higher counts before. In 2021, after a government document suggested 16 launches, he called that “extremely unlikely” and said eight tankers would be the most required.
Much of the answer depends on hardware SpaceX has not finished flying. As Teslarati noted earlier this year, the company plans to carry out the refueling process with its upgraded V3 Starship, and Precourt described Artemis IV as carrying “a large number of firsts.” He also praised NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman’s team for working to clear obstacles for both SpaceX and Blue Origin, whose Blue Moon lander does not rely on orbital refueling for its first mission.
Tesla has a Cybercab problem nobody saw coming
How SpaceX Is raising Raptor’s sea-level thrust while holding engine mass steady
