

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
NYC Comptroller moves to sue Tesla for securities violations

New York City Comptroller Brad Lander is urging the NYC Law Department to sue Tesla for securities violations related to CEO Elon Musk’s involvement in the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).
Lander said the basis for the potential litigation lies on “material misstatements from Tesla claiming that CEO Elon Musk spends significant time on the company and is highly active in its management, despite his helming the Trump Administration’s DOGE initiative.”
🚨 NEWS: New York City Comptroller Brad Lander wants to sue Tesla by claiming CEO Elon Musk’s role as the head of DOGE is hurting the stock.
Lander said that Musk was “effectively quitting his job at Tesla” by assuming the role with DOGE. pic.twitter.com/p9eMq9mMbr
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) April 1, 2025
It is a common complaint amongst some Tesla shareholders who are less than enthusiastic about Musk’s involvement in DOGE. Some feel as if Musk is not concerned about Tesla, especially as the stock has dropped over 28 percent this year. However, Musk has continued to double down on his position within the U.S. government.
Nevertheless, Musk’s position in Tesla is still very apparent. He headed an All-Hands meeting just two weeks ago that showed his commitment to the company as he outlined future plans and even joked to employees that they should hold onto their stock.
However, Lander believes Musk’s involvement has hurt New York City pension systems, which have lost over $300 million so far this year. He said:
“In less than three months, Tesla stock has lost nearly 40% of its value, with losses over $300 million for the New York City pension systems. We have long expressed concerns that the Tesla board has failed to provide independent oversight, or to require that Musk – or someone else – serve as a full-time CEO.”
Lander went on to say that “material misstatements from Tesla misled investors about his role at the company,” stating this was his reasoning for calling on the Law Department to file securities litigation against the company.
He believes taking it to court will force changes and will return Tesla shares back to a level that will benefit pension systems in New York City:
“Shareholder litigation could force the changes in governance and leadership that Tesla needs, and help recover some of our pension systems’ losses. Otherwise, we may need to consider divestment.”
The pension systems would be able to pursue financial damages to cover losses and seek governance changes, it says.
Elon Musk
Tesla is testing a Model 3 with some mysterious cameras in the U.S.

Tesla is testing a Model 3 with some mysterious cameras, potentially hinting toward the imminent release of the Cybercab and robotaxi platform in the United States.
After Tesla unveiled the Cybercab in Los Angeles in early October, the company suggested that it would be on its way to launching driverless rides in the U.S. in the near future.
Now, Tesla is inching toward a driverless ride-hailing service in Austin, Texas, among some other potential locations, but it is still working toward a platform that is robust enough to handle it.
Although the company’s Full Self-Driving suite is one of the more advanced on the market, Tesla is still working to accomplish what it feels is a mode of transportation that is safer than a human driver. The robotaxi and Cybercab rollouts will likely accomplish that, but there is still work to be done beforehand.
Now, Tesla is testing a Model 3 in the U.S. that was spotted in several different locations in the Northeastern part of the country, as cameras are seen on this vehicle in locations that are not necessarily typical for what it offers currently:
🚨 A user on r/TeslaMotors spotted this Model 3 with some interesting and never-before-seen camera locations.
Possible Cybercab or Next-Gen testing? pic.twitter.com/J6W6cKCiL9
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) March 31, 2025
Another one is seen here:
@teslascope Tesla spotted collecting Cybercab data WITH front bumper cam in Boston, MA. (Potentially different front cameras too.) Is Tesla currently including bumper cam video in training data? Will this be required for Unsupervised? pic.twitter.com/5rHPOp2tBe
— Dylan (@Dylan02939106) March 31, 2025
Interestingly, we saw similar camera locations on the Cybercab at the event in October. Tesla is not testing the Cybercab but instead implementing these cameras on a comparable position on its other vehicles.
These are the cameras we spotted on the Cybercab at the event in October:
In the past, Tesla has used a variety of strategies to measure self-driving accuracy, including LiDAR, which has been seen on some testing mules that we have spotted out in public.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk has said that the company does not need LiDAR on testing mules for ground truth, but we still spot them from time to time on public roads.
It’s an appropriate way just to cross Ts and dot Is:
Tesla Model X testing mule spotted with LiDAR rig ahead of Robotaxi event
The company is still moving toward that initial rollout of driverless ride-hailing in Austin in June, and some company executives have stated that the Cybercab will be the vehicle it uses for these initial rides.
Elon Musk
Tesla adds security feature to Android with latest software update

Tesla is bolstering its release of features to Android users as it is rolling out some new things with its latest software update.
Update v4.43.5 will see Tesla add a Dashcam Viewer for Android phones, a new feature that will make it simpler to access and manage both Dashcam and Sentry Mode videos. This has been available to iPhone users for some time, but Android owners have not had access to this quite yet.
Tesla describes the release of the feature in release notes (via Not a Tesla App):
“The Dashcam Viewer is now available in the Tesla app for Android users.
The Dashcam Viewer makes it easy to access and manage your car’s Dashcam and Sentry Mode videos. Accessing videos on your phone is faster and more convenient, but it does come with a few requirements.
The Dashcam Viewer in the Tesla app allows you to view, delete, or save video clips right from your device. This should result in higher quality content being shared online and fewer videos of owners recording their Tesla’s screens with their phones.”
The feature creates a more convenient option to view things that your Tesla has captured on its dashcam or on its external cameras through Sentry Mode, its security camera system that records things that happen around the vehicle.
Sentry Mode has been a great addition for Tesla owners lately, as more and more instances of vandalism have been occurring in the past few months.
It seems Tesla might have made it a point to roll this feature out, especially as it would allow those who are getting Sentry Mode alerts to capture footage of keying or tire slashing, two common techniques used by those who dislike Tesla and/or Elon Musk.
Tesla quietly added this extra Sentry Mode feature to deter vandals
The last time Tesla rolled out some features to Android owners was in January when it beefed up offerings for those who do not use iOS. The January update saw Phone Key Improvements and Hands-Free Trunk Opening make their way to Android users.
-
News2 weeks ago
Tesla aiming to produce first “legion” of Optimus robots this 2025
-
Elon Musk1 week ago
Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s simple message to vandals
-
Elon Musk2 weeks ago
Elon Musk confirms two measures Tesla is taking to fight vandalism
-
News1 week ago
Tesla’s Giga Berlin director responds to anti-Musk criticism
-
Elon Musk2 weeks ago
Tesla owners doxxed by controversial anti-DOGE website in clear intimidation tactic
-
Elon Musk2 weeks ago
Elon Musk to file lawsuit against former US Rep Jamaal Bowman: “I’ve had enough”
-
News1 week ago
Tesla Model Y inventory is going fast, selling out in many U.S. states
-
Elon Musk2 weeks ago
Tesla kicked from popular auto show as event succumbs to protest pressure