

News
SpaceX nears big US govt. missions as ULA handwaves about risks of competition
Speaking at the 2018 Von Braun Symposium in Huntsville, Alabama, ULA COO John Elbon expressed worries that the US National Security Space (NSS) apparatus could be put at significant risk if it comes to rely too heavily on the commercial launch industry to assure access to space.
Given that the US military’s launch capabilities rest solely on SpaceX and ULA and will remain that way for at least three more years, Elbon’s comment was effectively an odd barb tossed in the direction of SpaceX and – to a lesser extent – Blue Origin, two disruptive and commercially-oriented launch providers.
- The history of ULA and its Delta IV rocket is far wilder than most would expect. (Tom Cross)
- The first stage of Parker Solar Probe’s Delta IV Heavy rocket prepares to be lifted vertical. (ULA)
Reading between the lines
For the most part, Elbon’s brief presentation centered around a reasonable discussion of ULA’s track record and future vehicle development, emphasizing the respectable reliability of its current Atlas V and Delta IV rockets and the ‘heritage’ they share with ULA’s next-generation Vulcan vehicle. However, the COO twice brought up an intriguing concern that the US military launch apparatus could suffer if it ends up relying too heavily on ‘commercially-sustained’ launch vehicles like Falcon 9/Heavy or New Glenn.
To provide historical context and evidence favorable to his position, Elbon brought up a now-obscure event in the history of the launch industry, where – 20 years ago – companies Lockheed Martin and Boeing reportedly “set out to develop … Atlas V and Delta IV” primarily to support the launch of several large satellite constellations. The reality and causes of the US launch industry’s instability in the late ’90s and early ’00s is almost indistinguishable from this narrative, however.
Despite the many veils of aerospace and military secrecy surrounding the events that occurred afterward, the facts show that – in 1999 – Boeing (per acquisition of McDonnell Douglas) and Lockheed Martin (LM) both received awards of $500M to develop the Delta IV and Atlas V rockets, and the military further committed to buying a full 28 launches for $2B between 2002 and 2006. Combined, the US military effectively placed $3B ($4.5B in 2018 dollars) on the table for its Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) program with the goal of ensuring uninterrupted access to space for national security purposes.
- Crew Dragon arrives at ISS. (SpaceX)
- Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft. (Boeing)
- A mockup of Boeing’s Starliner capsule is explored by one of NASA’s Commercial Crew astronauts, clad in a Boeing spacesuit. (Boeing)
- SpaceX’s Commercial Crew pressure suit seen on NASA astronauts during testing. (SpaceX)
Rocketing into corporate espionage
“The robust commercial market forecast led the Air Force to reconsider its acquisition strategy. The EELV acquisition strategy changed from a planned down-select to a single contractor and a standard Air Force development program [where the USAF funds vehicle development in its entirety] to a dual commercialized approach that leveraged commercial market share and contractor investment.” – USAF EELV Fact Sheet, March 2017
The above quote demonstrates that there is at least an inkling of truth in Elbon’s spin. However, perhaps the single biggest reason that the EELV program and its two awardees stumbled was gross, inexcusable conduct on the part of Boeing. In essence, the company’s space executives conspired to use corporate espionage to gain an upper-hand over Lockheed Martin, knowledge which ultimately allowed Boeing to severely low-ball the prices of its Delta IV rocket, securing 19 of 28 available USAF launch contracts.
Ultimately, Lockheed Martin caught wind of Boeing’s suspect behavior and filed a lawsuit that began several years of USAF investigations and highly unpleasant revelations, while Boeing also had at least 10 future launch contracts withdrawn to the tune of ~$1B (1999). USAF investigations discovered that Boeing had lied extensively to the Air Force for more than four years – the actual volume of information stolen would balloon wildly from Boeing’s initial reports of “seven pages of harmless data” to 10+ boxes containing more than 42,000 pages of extremely detailed technical and proprietary information about Lockheed Martin’s Atlas V rocket proposal.
“If you rewind the clock 20 years, there were folks on a panel like this having dialogue about commercial launch, and there were envisioned several constellations that were going to require significant commercial launch. Lockheed Martin and Boeing set out to develop launch vehicles that were focused on that very robust commercial market – in the case of McDonald Douglas at the time, which later became Boeing, the factory in Decatur was…sized to crank out 40 [rocket boosters] a year, a couple of ships were bought to transport those…significant infrastructure put in place to address that envisioned launch market.” – John Elbon, COO, United Launch Alliance (ULA)
- ULA’s Decatur, Alabama factory now produces both Delta IV and Atlas 5. (ULA)
- ULA’s Atlas 5 launched AEHF-4 for the USAF earlier this month. (ULA)
In reality, Boeing was so desperate to secure USAF launches – despite the fact that it knew full well that Delta IV was too expensive to be sustainably competitive – that dozens of employees were eventually roped into a systematic, years-long, highly-illegal program of corporate espionage specifically designed to beat out government launch competitor Lockheed Martin. Humorously, Delta IV was not even Boeing’s design – rather, Boeing acquired designer McDonnell Douglas in late 1996, five days before the USAF announced the decision to reject Boeing and another company’s EELV proposals, narrowing down to two finalists (McDonnell Douglas and Lockheed Martin).
Seven years after the original lawsuit snowballed, Boeing settled with Lockheed Martin for a payment of more than $600M in 2006, accepting responsibility for its employees’ actions but admitting no corporate wrongdoing. Five years after that settlement, John Elbon became Vice President of Boeing’s Space Exploration division. This is by no means to suggest that Elbon is in any way complicit, having spent much of his 30+ years at Boeing managing the company’s involvement in the International Space Station, but more serves as an example of how recent these events are and why their consequences almost certainly continue to reverberate loudly within the US space industry.
SpaceX forces change
Worsened significantly by the consequences of Boeing’s lies about the actual operational costs of its Delta IV rocket (it had planned to secretly write off a loss on each rocket in order to steal USAF market share from LockMart), the commercial market for the extremely expensive rocket was and still is functionally nonexistent. 35 out of the family’s 36 launches have been contracted by the US military (30), NOAA (3), or NASA (2); the rocket’s first launch, likely sold at a major discount to Eutelsat, remains its one and only commercial mission.
Atlas V, typically priced around 30% less than comparable Delta IV variants, has had a far more productive career, albeit with very few commercial launches since the Dec. 2006 formation of the United Launch Alliance. Since 2007, just 5 of Atlas V’s 70 launches have been for commercial customers. Frankly, although Atlas V was appreciably more affordable than Delta IV, neither rocket was ever able to sustainably compete with Europe’s Ariane 5 workhorse – Ariane 5 cost more per launch, but superior payload performance often let Arianespace manifest two large satellites on a single launch, approximately halving the cost for each customer. Russia’s affordable (but only moderately reliable) Proton rockets also played an important role in the commercial launch industry prior to SpaceX’s arrival.
After fighting tooth and nail for years to break ULA’s US governmental launch monopoly, SpaceX’s first dedicated National Security Space launch finally occurred less than a year and a half ago, in May 2017. SpaceX has since placed a USAF spaceplane and a classified NSS-related satellite into orbit and been awarded launch contracts for critical USAF payloads, most notably winning five of five competed GPS III satellite launches, to begin as early as mid-December. Falcon 9 will cost the USAF roughly 30% less than a comparable Atlas 5 contract, $97M to ULA’s ~$135M.
- The aft connection mechanisms on Falcon Heavy Flight 1 and Flight 2 appear to be quite similar. It’s possible that SpaceX has chosen to reuse aspects of the hardware recovered on Flight 1’s two side boosters. (SpaceX)
- Falcon 9 Block 5 booster B1046 seen during both of its post-launch landings. (SpaceX/SpaceX)
A bit more than two decades after Boeing bought McDonnell Douglas and began a calculated effort to steal trade secrets from Lockheed Martin, Elbon – now COO of the Boeing/Lockheed Martin-cooperative ULA – seems to fervently believe that the most critical mistake made in the late 1990s and early 2000s was the USAF’s decision to partially support the development of two separate rockets. Elbon concluded his remarks on the topic with one impressively unambiguous summary of ULA’s position:
“We have to make sure that we don’t get too much supply and not enough demand so that the [launch] providers can’t survive in a robust business environment, and then we lose the capability as a country to do the launches we need to do … [That’s] the perspective we have at ULA and it’s based on the experience that we’ve been through in the past.”
In his sole Delta IV vs. Atlas V case-study, what ULA now seems to think might have been “too much supply” under the USAF’s EELV program appears to literally be the fundamental minimum conditions needed for competition to exist at all – two companies offering two competing products. Short of directly stating as much, it’s difficult to imagine a more concise method of revealing the apparent belief that competition – at all – is intrinsically undesirable or risky.
Elon Musk
SpaceX is preparing to launch Starship V2 one final time
The mission will test reentry dynamics, new landing burn configurations, and heat-shield upgrades.

SpaceX is preparing to launch its final Starship V2 rocket on October 13, 2025. The launch closes the curtain on Starship V2 and marks the start of the ambitious spacecraft’s V3 era.
Liftoff for Flight 11 is scheduled for 7:15 p.m. ET from Starbase in South Texas, with a 75-minute launch window. The mission will test reentry dynamics, new landing burn configurations, and heat-shield upgrades ahead of the transition to the next-generation Starship V3.
Starship V3 and beyond
Elon Musk confirmed on X that Starship V3 is already in production and could be “built & tested” and perhaps even flown before the end of 2025. The new version is expected to feature major performance and scale improvements, with Musk stating that Starship V3, provided that things go well, might be capable of reaching Mars, though V4 is more likely to perform a full-scale mission to the red planet.
“Only one more V2 left to launch,” Musk wrote back in August following Starship’s successful Flight 10 mission. In another post, Musk stated that “Starship V3 is a massive upgrade from the current V2 and should be through production and testing by end of year, with heavy flight activity next year.”
Starship V2’s final mission
Flight 11 is designed to push the limits of Starship V2. SpaceX engineers have intentionally removed heat-shield tiles in vulnerable areas to analyze how the vehicle handles atmospheric reentry under stress, as noted in a Space.com report. The test will also refine subsonic guidance algorithms and new landing burn sequences for the Super Heavy booster that would be used for Starship V3.
“Super Heavy will ignite 13 engines at the start of the landing burn and then transition to a new configuration with five engines running for the divert phase. Previously done with three engines, the planned baseline for V3 Super Heavy will use five engines during the section of the burn responsible for fine-tuning the booster’s path, adding additional redundancy for spontaneous engine shutdowns.
“The booster will then transition to its three center engines for the end of the landing burn, entering a full hover while still above the ocean surface, followed by shutdown and dropping into the Gulf of America,” SpaceX wrote in a post on its official website.
Elon Musk
xAI’s new facility will save Memphis 5 billion gallons of water annually
The project was described as a long-needed solution for the region as it will be capable of recycling up to 13 million gallons of greywater daily.

Elon Musk’s artificial intelligence startup, xAI, has officially broken ground on its $80 million wastewater treatment facility in Memphis, Tennessee. The project aims to reduce strain on the Memphis aquifer by 9% and repurpose 20% of wastewater from the nearby Memphis T.E. Maxson wastewater facility that would otherwise flow back into the Mississippi River.
A major step towards sustainability
City officials, including Councilman J. Ford Canale and Memphis Chamber of Commerce CEO and President Ted Townsend, joined xAI staff at the October 10 ceremony. The project was described as a long-needed solution for the region as it will have a treatment capacity of 13 million gallons daily, which would then be used for industrial cooling use xAI and the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA).
This means that the facility will help conserve 5 billion gallons of potable water annually, easing demand on Memphis’ primary water system. At these levels, xAI Memphis noted that its wastewater treatment facility will feature the largest ceramic membrane MBR in the world, using 13,000 membrane modules that collectively span over 900,000 square feet, roughly the size of 16 football fields.
Construction permits have been secured for the pump station, while the main operations permit from the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation remains under review.
A privately funded push
The wastewater treatment facility represents a rare privately funded water reclamation initiative, with xAI covering construction costs, as noted in a Yahoo News report. The company filed preliminary plans through its affiliate CTC Property LLC in 2024, hinting at the startup’s long-term commitment to sustainable infrastructure around its growing Memphis operations. TVA CEO and President Don Moul shared his excitement for the project.
“This is a big day for Memphis, Tennessee. This initiative not only reduces our need to purchase water from MLGW for our nearby Allen Combined Cycle Plant, but it also eases demand on the region’s potable water system. By recycling water for cooling purposes, we’re helping to preserve drinking water for the community and advancing a solution that benefits both the environment and the Greater Memphis area,” he said.
News
Japan paves the way for Tesla Full Self-Driving domestic rollout
Tesla’s vehicles are allowed to be retrofitted with a software update that could enable the activation of self-driving features.

Japan seems to be taking some serious steps to pave the way for the domestic rollout of Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (FSD) system in the country.
This was hinted at by a decision from the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism Ministry.
FSD update
As noted in a report from Nikkei, Tesla’s artificial intelligence-powered vehicles are allowed to be retrofitted with a software update that could enable the activation of their self-driving features. These features would be rolled out through an over-the-air (OTA) software update for vehicles that have already been sold to consumers.
Previous reports have indicated that Tesla Japan has started the testing of FSD technology on public roads. At the time, reports indicated that Tesla Japan employees have been conducting the tests, and the company is planning to release its FSD software to consumers in the near future, at least pending compliance with safety standards and guidelines.
New guidelines
In a comment on X, former Tesla Board Member Hiro Mizuno explained that the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism Ministry’s decision is no small matter, as it could pave the way for the smooth rollout of features like FSD to Tesla consumers in Japan.
“The Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism’s decision to allow retrofitting of autonomous driving through software updates is significant. Currently, Tesla is the only manufacturer actively pursuing this, but I had thought that if actual autonomous driving were to begin, it would be impossible to keep up if the approval process had to be repeated for every software update. As a result, this decision will make it easier for all manufacturers to introduce autonomous driving in Japan,” he wrote in a post on X.
-
News2 weeks ago
Tesla Giga Berlin’s water consumption has achieved the unthinkable
-
News2 weeks ago
Tesla unveils charging innovation that will make the Semi instantly successful
-
News2 weeks ago
Waymo responds to shocking video that would have gotten Tesla FSD crucified
-
News2 weeks ago
Lucid CEO shades Tesla Model S: “Nothing has changed in 12 years now”
-
News2 weeks ago
Elon Musk slams Sky News over Epstein invite: “Deserves complete contempt”
-
News2 weeks ago
Tesla Model Y sells faster than diesel cars and other EVs in Sweden’s used market
-
News6 days ago
Tesla FSD (Supervised) V14.1 with Robotaxi-style dropoffs is here
-
News1 week ago
Tesla all but confirms that affordable Model Y is coming Tuesday