Connect with us

News

SpaceX military launch cleared for historic rocket landing attempt

A Falcon 9 booster - likely B1060 - fired up its nine Merlin 1D engines during a routine Texas acceptance test on February 13th. (SpaceX)

Published

on

SpaceX officially has permission to perform a Falcon 9 booster recovery after its next launch for the US Air Force, now guaranteed to be the first time a rocket booster attempts to land during an operational launch for the US military.

Alongside their booster landing attempt confirmation, the USAF Space and Missile Systems Center (SMC) also posted the first official SpaceX video of a rocket acceptance test released in almost 2.5 years, a test it says was completed just days after the GPS satellite it’s scheduled to launch arrived in Florida. The very same Falcon 9 booster was shown off in unprecedented detail just last month and now SMC says that SpaceX fired up the rocket at its McGregor, Texas development facilities for a routine static fire on February 13th. The company is currently scheduled to launch its second USAF GPS III satellite – Space Vehicle 03 (SV03) – no earlier than 7am EDT (11:00 UTC), April 29th, a target set just days ago.

With the spacecraft in Florida and factory-fresh Falcon 9 booster successfully proofed, all that remains is for SpaceX to test and deliver the mission’s Falcon upper stage and payload fairing (if it hasn’t already). After the booster – believed to be B1060 – is inspected and its tanks are cleaned, it can also be packaged and transported by road the rest of the way to SpaceX’s Florida launch facilities, setting the company up for the critical mission and historic landing attempt.

While SpaceX has technically already landed Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy boosters after its NROL-76 and STP-2 launches for the NRO and USAF, the company only officially began operational military launches once its Falcon 9 rocket was fully certified. STP-2, for example, was effectively high-stakes make-work designed to help the USAF fully certify SpaceX’s brand new Falcon Heavy rocket to launch expensive – verging on irreplaceable – military satellites.

Its first truly operational US military launch occurred in December 2018, when Falcon 9 booster B1054 was intentionally expended in support the USAF’s inaugural GPS III launch, successfully placing the first of 10 (or 32) planned upgraded navigation satellites into orbit. It’s believed that the USAF required such extreme safety margins (extra propellant and performance) that SpaceX couldn’t even attempt booster or fairing recovery. This made B1054 the first (and hopefully only) Falcon 9 Block 5 booster to launch without even the basic hardpoints needed to attach landing legs.

Falcon 9 lifts off with the US Air Force’s first ~$500M GPS III spacecraft, December 2018. (SpaceX)

Effectively confirming that B1054’s demise was was a contrivance and by no means a technical necessity, the SMC announced on February 20th that SpaceX’s GPS III SV03 mission is officially “the first time a booster is planned to land on a drone ship during a NSS [National Security Space] launch.” Effectively identical to B1054 aside from the addition of grid fins and landing legs, this means that Falcon 9 booster B1060 will be able to attempt a landing aboard a SpaceX drone ship shortly after launch.

The GPS III SV03 satellite is seen in September 2019 as technicians prepare it for transport. (Lockheed Martin)

Just like GPS III SV01 satellite launched by SpaceX in December 2018 and the GPS III SV02 satellite launched United Launch Alliance (ULA) launched in August 2019, GPS III SV03 is a more than $500 million spacecraft designed to upgrade the US GPS navigation constellation. SpaceX has already won five (of five) competitively-awarded GPS III launch contracts thanks to its Falcon 9 rocket’s exceptionally competitive pricing, meaning that there is an excellent chance the company will win many more in the near future.

GPS III SV03 is one of 10 “Block IIIA” satellites to be launched between 2018 and 2026 and will be followed by another 22 “Block IIIF” satellites to be built by Lockheed Martin for ~$330M apiece. All 26 unassigned spacecraft will need launches of their own between now and the mid-2030s, worth anywhere from $1-2.5B to SpaceX if the company performs well on all five of its first contracts and continues to crush competitor ULA on launch costs.

Advertisement
-
Falcon Heavy Flight 3 made use of both flight-proven side boosters and a new center core. Note the scorched landing legs and sooty exteriors. (SpaceX)
Falcon Heavy launched the USAF STP-2 mission with two flight-proven side boosters, launched barely 74 days after their first flights. Note the scorched landing legs and sooty exteriors. (NASA – Kim Shiflett)
USAF photographer James Rainier's remote camera captured this spectacular view of Falcon Heavy Block 5 side boosters B1052 and B1053 returning to SpaceX Landing Zones 1 and 2. (USAF - James Rainier)
Through Falcon Heavy STP-2, the Air Force has thus already directly supported an incredibly ambitious instance of orbital-class booster reuse. (USAF – James Rainier)

With the USAF already demonstrably interested in supporting Falcon booster reusability and now open to SpaceX recovering Falcon 9 boosters after moderately-challenging GPS III launches, it’s safe to say that SpaceX’s ultra-competitive pricing is here to stay.

Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.

Eric Ralph is Teslarati's senior spaceflight reporter and has been covering the industry in some capacity for almost half a decade, largely spurred in 2016 by a trip to Mexico to watch Elon Musk reveal SpaceX's plans for Mars in person. Aside from spreading interest and excitement about spaceflight far and wide, his primary goal is to cover humanity's ongoing efforts to expand beyond Earth to the Moon, Mars, and elsewhere.

Advertisement
Comments

Investor's Corner

Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court

Tesla and SpaceX sue a small Illinois firm after cease and desist letters over Terafab.

Published

on

By

SpaceX Terafab rendering

Tesla and SpaceX are asking a federal judge to rule that their planned Terafab chip factory does not infringe a small Illinois company’s trademark, a request that arrives only after months of quiet negotiation broke down this summer.

The dispute traces to May 18, when Tesla filed three U.S. trademark applications for “Terafab” and “Tesla Terafab,” covering semiconductor chips and related chip making services. TERA-print LLC, a nanotechnology company that has held a federal trademark for “Tera-Fab” since 2021, responded five days later with a cease and desist letter. According to the lawsuit, first reported by Reuters, TERA-print argued that Tesla and SpaceX’s use of “Terafab” would confuse consumers familiar with its own trademark, which covers a desktop photolithography printer sold to researchers for sensor and bioengineering work.

What stands out in the filing is the timing of TERA-print’s own paperwork. One day before sending that cease and desist letter, on May 22, TERA-print applied to expand its existing registration to cover semiconductor materials, silicon chips, nanoelectronic devices and AI design services, categories it had not previously claimed. Tesla and SpaceX call that filing opportunistic in their complaint, noting it arrived two months after Tesla’s public Terafab announcement and just days after Tesla’s own trademark applications went in.

Elon Musk launches TERAFAB: The $25B Tesla-SpaceXAI chip factory that will rewire the AI industry

By June 10, TERA-print was threatening to sue for federal trademark infringement, false designation of origin and unfair competition, the complaint states. Rather than wait to be sued, Tesla, SpaceX and SpaceXAI met with TERA-print six separate times between June and August trying to resolve the dispute directly. Those talks collapsed, and the companies filed for declaratory judgment this week in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, asking a judge to find that “Terafab” does not infringe TERA-print’s mark before TERA-print can file a claim of its own.

TERA-print isn’t backing down. The company told PCMag it discussed a settlement with Tesla as recently as September 2 and feels misled by what it called Tesla’s professed interest in settling. Its CTO, Andrey Ivankin, said TERA-print holds a Defense Department contract to fabricate semiconductors and partially owns Mattiq Inc., an AI company built on TERA-print’s products, and that the company will vigorously defend its rights.

Tesla and SpaceX argue the overlap is superficial. Terafab is planned as a $16.8 billion complex spanning roughly 100 million square feet at the Grimes County site SpaceX confirmed last month, built to produce chips for Optimus robots, Tesla’s AI computing needs and SpaceX’s orbital data center ambitions, a scale and purpose the companies say no reasonable consumer would confuse with a tabletop lab printer. TERA-print’s product line has stayed focused on lithography tools for biological and sensor research since it registered its mark in 2021.

The trademark fight is the second legal dispute tied to the Terafab project in the past week, following a separate SpaceX suit aimed at keeping company records about the facility out of public view, as KBTX reported. Whether construction proceeds under the Terafab name now depends on a federal judge in Austin.

Continue Reading

News

NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way

NHTSA escalated its Cybercab audit into a sworn Special Order with a September 30 deadline.

Published

on

By

Federal regulators have moved from asking Tesla questions about its Cybercab to demanding sworn answers. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued a Special Order that requires a Tesla officer to sign an affidavit attesting to the completeness of the company’s responses, with a deadline of September 30.

The order builds on Audit Query AQ26002, which NHTSA opened on September 3, the same day Tesla began commercial Cybercab service in Austin. Teslarati covered that initial inquiry when it surfaced, noting the agency wanted to understand how Tesla certified a vehicle with no permanently attached steering wheel, pedals, or mirrors as compliant with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. A Special Order is a different tool and converts a fact finding review into a legally enforceable demand, the same mechanism NHTSA used against Tesla in 2023 during its Autopilot investigation.

Several of the 21 requests target a specific gap in Cybercab’s design. One asks whether Tesla used temporarily attached human controls at any point to help certify the vehicle, and if so, which standards depended on that equipment being present. Another quotes an existing rule directly: “The service brakes shall be activated by means of a foot control.” Cybercab has no foot pedal. NHTSA wants a detailed explanation of how the vehicle satisfies that requirement, and how it complies without the kind of exemption granted to Zoox in July under Part 555, the regulatory pathway built for steering wheel free vehicles.

The order does not claim Cybercab is unsafe or that Tesla broke a rule. It requires Tesla to explain, under oath, the reasoning behind decisions the company already made when it self-certified the vehicle. That distinction matters, but so does the exposure. Motor1’s reporting, summarized here, put potential civil penalty exposure as high as $139 million if NHTSA later finds the certification was flawed, on top of whatever criminal risk comes with a false sworn statement.

Tesla has not said publicly how it plans to respond. Cybercab is still carrying passengers in Austin through the Robotaxi app while the September 30 deadline approaches, and the company has continued expanding the vehicle’s footprint even as the regulatory question remains open. The Special Order does not pause any of that and just sets a date by which Tesla has to put its certification logic on the record, with a company officer’s name attached to it.

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

Tesla uber bull Ron Baron says ‘the time to buy the stock is now’

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

In a new interview on Wednesday, Tesla uber bull Ron Baron said that anyone looking to buy the company’s stock should do so as soon as they can.

Baron, founder and CEO of Baron Capital and one of Tesla’s most persistent institutional bulls, used a CNBC Squawk Box appearance on Wednesday to deliver a familiar message with fresh urgency: In his opinion, Tesla stock is a buy:

“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.”

The Baron Capital frontman’s case is built around Full Self-Driving. Tesla reported 1.48 million active FSD subscriptions in the second quarter, up 56 percent year over year, and company officials have said roughly 55 percent of new North American deliveries left with a subscription enabled.

Baron framed that attach rate as proof the product is moving from enthusiast extra to default expectation, and as a reason software, not just vehicle volume, should drive the next phase of value.

His conviction on Tesla shares is not theoretical, as Baron Capital made its first Tesla investment in 2014, after years of meetings that began around the 2010 IPO roadshow. The firm later built a large SpaceX position starting in 2017.

Baron said those Musk-led bets have generated about $30 billion of the $71 billion in profits Baron Capital has produced for clients. He put the firm’s current exposure at roughly $25 billion in SpaceX and $5 billion in Tesla. Personally, he described SpaceX as his largest holding, at about $5 billion, with about $1.5 billion in Tesla and additional Tesla exposure through the firm’s funds.

That concentration is also a statement of loyalty. Asked about talk of a SpaceX-Tesla combination, Baron said he had already walked Elon Musk through arguments for and against a deal, then declined to repeat them on air. His public position was simpler: “Whatever you decide is better is what I’m going to support,” he said to Musk.

Baron also said that he picked up the farewell edition of the Model S after Tesla decided to sunset the vehicle earlier this year, calling it his favorite car he’s ever driven.

Continue Reading