News
SpaceX’s Starlink eyed by US military as co. raises $500-750M for development
In a reasonably predictable turn of events, SpaceX has been awarded a healthy $28.7M contract to study, develop, and test possible military applications of its prospective Starlink internet satellite constellation.
Previously reported by Teslarati in August 2018, FCC applications related to Starlink revealed that SpaceX had plans to develop and test Starlink interconnectivity with conformal antenna arrays installed on aircraft, all but directly pointing to military involvement with a reference to the need for aerial maneuvers “[representative] of a high-performance aircraft.”
The Air Force just gave @SpaceX $28.7 million for Starlink experimentation. https://t.co/fr2bBHJkDN
— Eric Berger (@SciGuySpace) December 21, 2018
Around the same time as those FCC documents surfaced, the US Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) spoke with AviationWeek about plans to experiment with the potential capabilities offered by a flurry of proposed low Earth orbit (LEO) internet satellite constellations, including the likes of SpaceX’s Starlink, OneWeb, a Telesat network, and others. While no specific companies were fingered in AFRL’s public statements, it was far too convenient to be a coincidence. Four months later, the below transaction was published in the Department of Defense’s running list of new contract awards:
“[SpaceX], Hawthorne, California, has been awarded a $28,713,994 competitive, firm-fixed-price … agreement for experimentation … in the areas of establishing connectivity [and] operational experimentation … [and] will include connectivity demonstrations to Air Force ground sites and aircraft for experimental purposes. For the proposed Phase 2, the awardee proposes to perform experiments [with] early versions of a commercial space-to-space data relay service and mobile connectivity directly from space to aircraft.” – Department of Defense, FBO FA8650-17-S-9300
Those dots were fairly easy to connect earlier this year, but this agreement confirms the apparent arrangement with certainty. Almost three months after SpaceX could have received its initial funding, it’s possible that the company has already begun basic testing along the described lines with the two prototype Starlink satellites currently in orbit, although no FCC or FAA filings (that I am aware of) have suggested that those tests are ongoing. SpaceX may be waiting for the launch of a second generation of Starlink prototype satellites to begin seriously putting its antenna and communications technologies through their mid-air paces.
SpaceX seeks approval for Starlink internet tests on high-performance govt. planes https://t.co/FSUFgFXOQW
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) August 15, 2018
Early answers to the biggest question
At this point in time, the viability and potential utility of Starlink and other large LEO constellations are well established. What has not been established, however, is how exactly any of the proposed constellations – especially Starlink – can go from paper to orbit. In other words, the reasonable question to ask of any company pursuing such an endeavor is how they plan to fund the acquisition of capital-intensive manufacturing infrastructure and launch services.
Ultimately, SpaceX will receive $19.1M of the full $28.7M sum from the DoD in FY2019 (Oct 1, 2018 to Sept 30, 2019). This absolutely dwarfs all other contracts awarded thus far under the AFRL’s Defense Experimentation Using Commercial Space Internet (DEUCSI) program, which began in August 2017 and has since awarded $2.5M and $5.6M contracts to Iridium and L3, respectively. In the grand scheme of things, ~$30M is a pittance in the face of the extensive investments SpaceX needs to make if it hopes to mass-produce high-performance satellites at a truly unprecedented scale.
-
- An unofficial analysis of SpaceX’s first ~1600 Starlink satellites. (Mark Handley)
-
- One of the first two prototype Starlink satellites separates from Falcon 9’s upper stage, February 2018. (SpaceX)
-
- SpaceX’s Starlink satellite constellation efforts could provide the company with valuable experience that can be applied around Mars. (unofficial logo by Eric Ralph)
This is where a duo of major investment and fundraising developments come into play. In the last several months, word has gotten out that SpaceX secured a respectable $250M loan through the sale of debt, and more recently wrapped up an equity investment round to the tune of $500M, playing off of long-time investors with a demonstrated interest in belief in the company’s long-term vision. For unknown reasons, SpaceX had originally looked into raising the full $750M through a debt-equity loan, but – despite reports that its market was very healthy – soon cut the offering to $500M and eventually $250M, which it ultimately secured in November. Combined with a traditional $500M equity-investment uncovered earlier this month, SpaceX appears to have nearly completed fundraising of more than $750M in the second half of 2018 alone.
.@WSJ reports that @SpaceX is raising $500M to get its #Starlink broadband satellite service off the ground: https://t.co/dQTKE10NpB H/T @RolfeWinkler pic.twitter.com/ufx02xNWLv
— Alan Boyle 👽 (@b0yle) December 18, 2018
Put a different way, SpaceX has very rapidly gotten very serious about doubling down on Starlink. According to the Wall Street Journal, who originally broke the news of a new $500M equity round, that funding is to be predominately focused on getting Starlink up and running as a serious venture capable of mass-producing satellites. According to a recent Reuters analysis of the Starlink program, CEO Elon Musk challenged the company to begin dedicated launches of operational Starlink satellites as early as June 2019, and the company also plans to launch another round of improved (Gen 2) satellite prototypes early next year.
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!
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.
The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.
The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”
Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Napoli said:
“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.
As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.
We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.
My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.
I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”
🚨 Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli calls rumors of financial issues “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Read his full remarks here: https://t.co/t3Pg1NHvzy pic.twitter.com/LvHUPhO4Qf
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 15, 2026
It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.
Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.
Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.
Tesla has once again demonstrated strong customer focus by swiftly addressing and fully refunding a bizarre Supercharger pricing glitch that affected drivers in Atlantic Canada.
The issue surfaced earlier this month when the Tesla app began displaying dramatically inflated per-minute charging rates at stations in Prince Edward Island and parts of New Brunswick.
One widely shared screenshot from a Charlottetown, PEI Supercharger showed rates reaching ridiculous levels: $6.00 per minute for the 180-250 kW tier, along with $3.57/min for 100-180 kW and $2.29/min for 60-100 kW.
Correct pricing will be going live at midnight tonight. All fees since July 2nd 2026 will be waived.
— Tesla Charging (@TeslaCharging) July 13, 2026
These figures were several times higher than normal Supercharger pricing in the region.
To put the error in perspective, charging at the highest incorrect rate would have been shockingly expensive.
At 250 kW, a common charging speed at Superchargers, a vehicle pulls roughly 4.17 kWh per minute. Under the glitch, a driver spending just 10 minutes at peak power would face a $60 bill. A typical 20- to 30-minute session to add meaningful range could have cost $120 to $180 or more, before any congestion fees.
Tesla gets another layer of gamification with Free Supercharging on the line
By comparison, standard Canadian Supercharger rates usually fall between $0.25 and $0.60 per kWh, making a similar session cost roughly $15–$40. The erroneous per-minute structure, combined with the inflated numbers, turned what should be a convenient stop into a potential financial shock.
The glitch appears to have started sometime around early July, and quickly drew attention on social media as owners questioned whether Tesla had implemented steep hidden increases. Some drivers even reported seeing $0 charges in their history, indicating broader billing confusion.
Tesla’s official Charging account on X stated that correct pricing would roll out at midnight on July 13, so the fix is already in effect. More importantly, the company announced it would waive all fees for every Supercharger session since July 2. This blanket waiver covers the entire affected period without requiring users to file individual claims, with automated refunds expected soon. The decision affects stations in PEI and nearby areas in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.
It’s a classy move, and rather than issuing partial credits or forcing owners to submit support tickets, Tesla simply absorbed the cost of the system error and made drivers whole. In an industry where hidden fees and bill disputes are common, Tesla’s proactive, no-questions-asked approach reinforces owner trust and highlights the company’s commitment to service excellence.
The incident, while disruptive for a short time, ultimately showcases Tesla’s ability to own mistakes and prioritize customer satisfaction. Atlantic Canada Tesla owners can now charge with confidence again, knowing the company has their back when technology glitches occur.
In an era of complex EV billing, such transparency and generosity are refreshing and set a positive example for the industry.
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
Elon Musk’s Texas ranch to showcase the lifelong work that changed the world
