News
SpaceX to in-house mass production of Starlink internet satellite hardware
SpaceX is rapidly expanding it’s Starlink internet constellation development to prepare for full-scale production and aims to bring nearly every major piece of satellite and network hardware and software in-house, according to details revealed in dozens of job postings.
While not explicit, this appears to indicate a significant convergence of multiple possible paths to an operational constellation. Put simply, SpaceX now intends to build every single major component of its 4400+ satellite network in-house. It’s almost easier to list the things SpaceX does not mean to build themselves, but here’s a stab at the components to be built in-house: satellite structures, laser (optical) data interlinks, on-orbit phased array antennae, digital signal processor (DSPs) software and hardware to aim those antennae, solar arrays, battery systems, power electronics, custom integrated circuitry and systems on a chip (SoCs), user terminals and larger gateways, network operations, production automation, autonomous satellite constellation management, and much, much more.
Remote camera has been retrieved, wet with morning dew…and WITH images! Awesome launch by SpaceX. @teslarati #SpaceX #Paz #Starlink pic.twitter.com/tDTXxZErN4
— Pauline Acalin (@w00ki33) February 22, 2018
While entire articles could be spent describing the complexities of every single one of the above subsystems, the point is that SpaceX appears to have gone all-in on building its own satellite constellation, departing from stances in the past that appeared to leave room for subcontracting and outsourcing the production of major parts of the network, particularly with respect to ground terminals and gateways. Postings for ground station and user terminal engineers describe a goal of medium to high volume in-house production of the critical network and customer-facing hardware, and an entry into the production of high volume consumer technology would be a truly eclectic and unprecedented step for a company theoretically focused on launch vehicle development and production and sustainable Mars colonization.
If anything, they speak to the truly vertical nature of SpaceX. Many technology development production companies would simply accede and accept the best subcontractor/outsourcing bid when entering into new territory truly outside of their internal expertise. SpaceX engineers and managers, however, seem to have concluded that the vast majority of hardware and corporate expertise they could co-opt is just not satisfactory for the purpose of building a paradigm-shifting satellite constellation; or as CEO Elon Musk noted in 2015, to “revolutionize the satellite side of things, just as we’ve done with the rocket side of things.”
-
- SpaceX’s first Starlink prototypes launched in late February aboard a flight-proven Falcon 9 booster. (Pauline Acalin)
-
- SpaceX’s first two Starlink prototype satellites are pictured here before their inaugural Feb. 2018 launch, showing off a utilitarian design. (SpaceX)
-
- Falcon 9 roars into the dark California sky with PAZ and Starlink. (Pauline Acalin)
This new (and, in retrospect, unsurprising) trailblazing attitude also helps to explain the marginal delay to Musk’s original 2015 schedule, which estimated initial constellation operations (i.e. a few hundred satellites launched) would begin around 2020. Approximately a year later, SpaceX had built rough prototypes in the form of the original Microsat 1A and 1B twins. This initial foray into independent, long-term communications smallsats was shuttered fairly quickly, and neither of the demo satellites were launched. Instead, SpaceX dove back into prototype design and development, culminating roughly two years later with the March 2018 launch of two dramatically improved prototypes, known as Tintin A and B (or Microsats 2A and 2B in FCC licenses).
It seems probable that the source of this delay lay in an internal decision to dramatically reconfigure the internet constellation for far more in-house development, whereas the original Microsats were likely pieced together from a range of components derived from SpaceX’s Cargo Dragon program or more simply from commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) offerings. Instead, SpaceX’s Starlink development offices in Redmond, Washington and throughout California are staffed with as many as 400 to 500 employees dedicated in large part to the nascent program, similar (if not larger) in scale to OneWeb, the only noteworthy satellite internet competitor at present.
If SpaceX’s decision to push back Starlink’s operational debut by a few years in order to bring in-house almost every single critical subcomponent of Starlink pays off, the company could begin launching finalized satellites en masse as early as late 2019/early 2020, with a goal of offering limited service by 2021 per comments made by CEO Elon Musk. Starlink is likely being brought almost entirely in-house because Musk or other high-level executives and engineers see major room for improvement, improvements that could lower the cost of and improve the performance of lightweight communications satellites by an order of magnitude.
A flight-proven Falcon 9 prepares for launch in May 2018. SpaceX will likely launch at least one more pair of Starlink demo satellites from the West coast later this year (Pauline Acalin)
It will likely take a bit longer than initially expected, but SpaceX may yet still pave their path to Mars colonization with profits derived from a wildly successful and disruptive entrance into the broadband market.
Elon Musk
ARK’s SpaceX IPO Guide makes a compelling case on why $1.75T may not be the ceiling
ARK Invest breaks down six reasons SpaceX’s $1.75 trillion IPO valuation may be justified.
ARK Invest, which holds SpaceX as its largest Venture Fund position at 17% of net assets, has published a detailed investor guide to why a SpaceX IPO may be grounded in a $1.75 trillion target valuation.
The financial case starts with Starlink, SpaceX’s satellite internet constellation, which has surpassed 10 million active subscribers globally as of early 2026, with 2026 revenue projected to exceed $20 billion. ARK’s research puts the total satellite connectivity market opportunity at roughly $160 billion annually at scale, and Starlink is adding customers faster than any telecom network in history. That growth alone would justify a substantial valuation.
Additionally, ARK notes that SpaceX has reduced the cost per kilogram to orbit from roughly $15,600 in 2008 to under $1,000 today through reusable Falcon 9 hardware. A fully operational Starship targeting sub-$100 per kilogram would represent a significant cost decline and open markets that do not currently exist. SpaceX executed a staggering 165 missions in 2025 and now accounts for approximately 85% of all global orbital launches. That infrastructure position took decades to build and would be nearly impossible to replicate at comparable cost.
SpaceX officially acquires xAI, merging rockets with AI expertise
The February 2026 merger with xAI added a layer to the valuation that straightforward financial models struggle to capture. ARK argues that at sub-$100 launch costs, orbital data centers could deliver compute roughly 25% cheaper than ground-based alternatives, without power grid delays, permitting friction, or land constraints. Musk has stated a goal of deploying 100 gigawatts of AI computing capacity per year from orbit.
The $1.75 trillion figure itself is not a conventional earnings multiple. At roughly 95x trailing revenue, it prices in Starlink’s adoption curve, Starship’s cost trajectory, and the orbital compute thesis together. The public S-1 prospectus, due at least 15 days before the June roadshow, will give investors their first complete look at the financials to test those assumptions. ARK’s position is that the track record earns the benefit of the doubt. Fully reusable rockets were considered unrealistic for years. Starlink was considered financially unviable. Both happened on timelines that surprised skeptics.
Elon Musk
Ford CEO Farley says Tesla is not who to look at for EV expertise
Interestingly, Farley has been one of the most hellbent CEOs in terms of a legacy automaker standpoint to push the EV effort. It did not go according to plan, as Ford took a $19.5 billion charge and retreated from its EV push in late 2025.
Ford CEO Jim Farley said in a recent podcast interview that Tesla is not who Americans should look at to beat Chinese carmakers.
The comments have sparked quite a bit of outrage from Tesla fans on X, the social media platform owned by Elon Musk.
Farley said that Chinese automakers are better examples of how to beat competitors. He said (via the Rapid Response Podcast):
“If you’re an American and you want us to beat the Chinese in the car business, you’re all going to want to pay attention, not necessarily to Tesla. Nothing against Tesla—they’ve been doing great—but they really don’t have an updated vehicle. The best in the business for us, cost-wise and competition-wise, supply chain, manufacturing expertise, and the I.P. in the vehicle, was really BYD. In this next cycle of EV customers in the U.S., they want pickups and utilities and all these different body styles. But they want them at $30,000, not $50,000. Like the first inning, they want them affordably.”
Despite Farley’s synopsis, it is worth mentioning that Tesla had the best-selling passenger vehicle in the world last year, and in China in March, as the Model Y continued its global dominance over other vehicles.
Musk responded to Farley’s comments by stating:
“This is before Supervised FSD is approved in China. Limiting factor is production output in Shanghai.”
This is before supervised FSD is approved in China. Limiting factor is production output in Shanghai.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) April 19, 2026
Interestingly, Farley has been one of the most hellbent CEOs in terms of a legacy automaker standpoint to push the EV effort. It did not go according to plan, as Ford took a $19.5 billion charge and retreated from its EV push in late 2025.
Ford cancels all-electric F-150 Lightning, announces $19.5 billion in charges
Instead, Ford is “doubling down on its affordable” EVs and said it would pivot from its previous plans.
Reaction from Tesla fans was pretty much how you would expect. Many said they have lost a lot of respect for Farley after his comments; others believe he is the last CEO anyone should be taking advice on EVs from.
Nevertheless, Farley’s plans are bold and brash; many consider Tesla the most ideal company to replicate EV efforts from. It will be interesting to see if Ford can rebound from this big adjustment, and hopefully, Farley’s plans to replicate efforts from BYD work out the way he hopes.
Elon Musk
SpaceX wins its first MARS contract but it comes with a catch
NASA awarded SpaceX a $175 million Mars rover contract while the White House proposes cutting the mission.
NASA just signed a $175.7 million contract with SpaceX to launch a Mars rover that the White House is simultaneously trying to defund. The contract, awarded on April 16, 2026, tasks SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy with launching the European Space Agency’s (ESA) Rosalind Franklin rover from Kennedy Space Center in Florida, no earlier than late 2028. It would mark the first time SpaceX has ever sent a payload to Mars.
Under NASA’s Rosalind Franklin Support and Augmentation project, known as ROSA, the agency is providing braking engines for the rover’s descent stage, radioisotope heater units that use decaying plutonium to keep the rover warm on the Martian surface, additional electronics, and a mass spectrometer instrument, as noted by SpaceNews.
Those nuclear heating units are the reason an American rocket was required at all. U.S. export controls on radioisotope technology mean any payload carrying them must launch on a domestic vehicle, which narrowed the field to SpaceX and United Launch Alliance. Falcon Heavy’s pricing made it the practical choice.
SpaceX is quietly becoming the U.S. Military’s only reliable rocket
Falcon Heavy debuted in February 2018 and has 11 launches to its record. The rocket has not flown since October 2024, when it sent NASA’s Europa Clipper toward Jupiter. The three-core design, built from modified Falcon 9 first stages, gives it the lift capacity needed for deep space planetary missions that a single Falcon 9 cannot reach.
The Rosalind Franklin rover has been sitting in storage in Europe for years. It was originally due to launch in 2022 as a joint mission with Russia, but Russia’s invasion of Ukraine ended that partnership, leaving the rover built but stranded without a launch vehicle or landing hardware. NASA stepped back in through a 2024 agreement with ESA to rescue the mission. The rover is designed to drill up to two meters below the Martian surface in search of evidence of past life, a science objective no previous mission has attempted at that depth.
The contradiction at the center of this story is hard to ignore. The White House’s fiscal year 2027 budget proposal included no funding for ROSA and did not mention the mission at all in the detailed congressional justification document released April 3.
Musk has long argued that reaching Mars is not optional. “We don’t want to be one of those single planet species, we want to be a multi-planet species.” Whether this particular mission survives Washington’s budget fight, the Falcon Heavy contract means SpaceX is now formally on record as the rocket that could get humanity’s next Mars science mission off the ground.
The timing of this contract carries extra weight given that SpaceX filed confidentially with the SEC in early April and is targeting an IPO roadshow in the week of June 8. It would be the largest public offering in history.
ARK’s SpaceX IPO Guide makes a compelling case on why $1.75T may not be the ceiling
Ford CEO Farley says Tesla is not who to look at for EV expertise
