News
SpaceX COO offers harsh critique of Falcon 9, Starlink, and Starship’s competitors
SpaceX President Gwynne Shotwell says that the company’s Starlink internet constellation is years ahead of competition from OneWeb and Amazon. A step further, the executive also voiced several unprecedently harsh critiques of Jeff Bezos’ Blue Origin and Boeing and Lockheed Martin (ULA).
SpaceX President and Chief Operating Officer Gwynne Shotwell has been as busy as ever and has attended numerous major events over the last few weeks, often speaking with an unprecedented level of candor. The famous SpaceX executive repeatedly indicated that competitors have over-promised and under-delivered and, as a result, are years behind SpaceX’s own Starlink constellation. SpaceX has already launched 60 prototype satellites and has hundreds more on the way as part of a bid to kick off a busy period of “v1.0” satellite.
SpaceX intends to launch has many as 24 dedicated Starlink missions next year, equating to 60 satellites launched every two or so weeks. Meanwhile, the company is in the late stages of preparing to mass-produce “user terminals” and ground stations with the hope of delivering internet service to customers internet as early as mid-2020.
Starlink, OneWeb, and Project Kuiper
Shotwell was especially critical of megaconstellation competitors OneWeb and Amazon, the latter of which began hiring just a few months ago for a several-thousand-satellite constellation known as Project Kuiper. During an October 25th Q&A session with billionaire Ron Baron at the Baron Fund’s annual Investment Conference, Shotwell was uncharacteristically candid about the spaceflight industry outside of SpaceX’s doors, pointing to Jeff Bezos’s Blue Origin and the United Launch Alliance as prime examples of the many pitfalls of traditional aerospace methods.
Shotwell, on SpaceX's competitors and why other companies haven't built and landed orbital rockets: "Boeing and Lockheed like their cushy situation."— Michael Sheetz (@thesheetztweetz) October 25, 2019
She responded by crediting the hard work of SpaceX engineers and the often ambitious timelines set forth by company CEO Elon Musk, stating that, “I don’t think there’s a motivation or a drive there.” She explained that she believes that “engineers think better when they’re pushed hardest to do great things in a very short period of time, with very few resources. Not when you have twenty years.” This is a bit of a brutal take given that SpaceX is infamous for offering an often brutally hostile work environment and some of the worst salaries in the industry, but it’s nearly impossible to deny that SpaceX’s list of achievements is essentially unrivaled.
Baron: Why hasn't Bezos been doing this? He's spending lots of money.
Shotwell: They're two years older than us and they've yet to reach orbit. They get $1 billion of "free money" each year but I think engineers work better when they're pushed.— Michael Sheetz (@thesheetztweetz) October 25, 2019
Discussing Blue Origin, Shotwell pulled no punches, stating that “they’ve got a ton of money and they’re not doing a lot.” While both companies – SpaceX and Blue Origin – have remained private and exist in large part thanks to their wealthy owners, SpaceX has pursued commercial relevance and become wildly successful. On the other hand, Blue Origin – despite being two years older – would likely lose all forward momentum or fold outright if owner Jeff Bezos were to cease bankrolling the spaceflight company.
Blue Origin is currently developing a large, reusable, orbital-class rocket known as New Glenn and could eventually become SpaceX’s only serious competition, but the rocket’s first launch is unlikely to occur before H2 2021 or 2022.
Simultaneously, Amazon recently revealed Project Kuiper, a slightly modified version of SpaceX’s Starlink constellation that is being lead by ex-Starlink executives fired by Elon Musk in June 2018. Project Kuiper, however, has only just begun and is likely at least 3-5 years away from beginning orbital testing, let alone providing any sort of service to customers.
Shotwell also addressed a new competitor in the large-scale satellite constellation market, OneWeb. During her talk with Baron, Shotwell bluntly warned potential investors to steer clear of the company. She boasted about SpaceX’s Starlink satellites, stating that they are “17 times better per bit”, a reference to Starlink’s greater per-satellite bandwidth, and cautioned that “if you’re thinking about investing in OneWeb, I would recommend strongly against it. They fooled some people who are going to be pretty disappointed in the near term.”
OneWeb later provided a follow up to CNBC reporter Michael Sheetz stating “we are not in the business of commenting on competitors. OneWeb’s satellites and constellation design are tested, market leading and we are excited to start our monthly launches soon and to start delivering much needed connectivity to people everywhere.” In reality, OneWeb and executives like Greg Wyler comment on competitors all the time, they just rarely put all their cards on the table.
Regardless, Shotwell’s streak of candor appears to have no end in sight. It remains to be seen whether her move towards uncharacteristically vitriolic public comments is a smart strategy, but she is undoubtedly making waves.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
News
SpaceX tells the FCC that Starship Flight 14 is going to orbit
SpaceX filed with the FCC for Starship Flight 14, its first true orbital launch attempt.
SpaceX has asked the Federal Communications Commission for permission to fly Starlink terminals during Starship’s fourteenth flight test, and the filing lays out a genuine trip to orbit, something the program has never attempted.
Every Starship flight so far, including Flight 13’s successful splashdown in the Indian Ocean on July 24, has flown a suborbital arc that ends with the ship reentering the atmosphere within the same hour it launches. The FCC paperwork describes a mission profile built around an actual orbital insertion instead.
The payload is the other half of the story. Flight 13 carried 20 production Starlink V3 satellites, but because that mission never reached orbit, the satellites reentered along with the ship rather than joining the constellation, something Teslarati covered in detail after SpaceX released footage shot from one of those satellites as it drifted away from Starship in space. Flight 14 is designed to close that gap. If the orbital insertion holds, the roughly 20 V3 satellites onboard would separate into an operational orbit and could eventually go into service, each one rated for about 1 terabit per second of downlink capacity by SpaceX’s own account.
SpaceX announces new Starbase for ‘thousands of Starship launches annually’
Elon Musk first flagged the orbital attempt during SpaceX’s August 4 earnings call, the company’s first as a public entity following its June IPO under the ticker SPCX. He also floated catching the ship with the Starbase tower on the same flight, an idea he walked back on August 20, saying the catch attempt would more likely come “in a few months,” as Teslarati reported at the time. Flight 14 will instead target a splashdown for the ship in the Indian Ocean, the same recovery method used since Flight 12.
Hardware has been catching up to the ambition. Booster 21 completed a full 33-engine static fire on August 28, and Ship 41 finished its own six-engine test the week before. An airspace briefing circulated to pilots on August 20 listed September 15 as the target date, later than the end of August window Musk mentioned on the earnings call, though SpaceX has not confirmed a launch date publicly and Starship schedules routinely slip while hardware and FAA paperwork line up.
The FCC filing itself does not guarantee a launch date. It covers communications authority, and not flight readiness, considering SpaceX still needs Ship 41 fully stacked and cleared by the FAA before Flight 14 can fly. But the filing is a real marker of intent and it puts a specific regulatory process behind what had so far only been Musk’s word on the earnings call.
Tesla is set to launch Cybercab on Thursday at an event in Austin, Texas, which will officially bring the company’s first steering wheel-less and pedal-less vehicle to a limited number of consumers for the first time.
The event, which is invite-only, is still thin on details: we’ll be there, and it seems the event will be held at Gigafactory Texas, but the launch of this vehicle truly relies on it being operational outside of the factory and on public roads.
🚨 Close-Up look at Tesla Cybercab without steering wheel: pic.twitter.com/9TXCDeDCz7
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 3, 2026
Nevertheless, there are some big things to expect, and other things to temper expectations on. For what it’s worth, we believe this event could be perhaps the biggest indication that Tesla is ready to truly enter a new phase and chapter in its historic story.
Tesla Cybercab’s First Foray into the Public with Real-World Riders
Cybercab will likely hit the streets of Austin and the surrounding areas, likely in the established geofence that Tesla has expanded on for the past 14 months. Just yesterday, Tesla expanded it once again by 9 percent.
Tesla will put, for the first time, a vehicle without any manual controls on public roads, likely without any help from teleoperators. This is a truly groundbreaking development if it comes through in this fashion: it would be groundbreaking for Tesla to roll out a truly driverless ride-hailing vehicle.
Cybercab Has Already Been Unveiled
This is not an unveiling event. Cybercab has been released for nearly two years, as Tesla first showed it to the public on October 10, 2024.
FIRST LOOK: Tesla ‘Cybercab’ Robotaxi makes its global debut
While there is some small speculation that Tesla could release the Roadster at the event as a surprise, it seems more likely the focus will be on the Cybercab and the huge accomplishment that will come with releasing a vehicle with no manual controls.
There Will Be a Lot of Hype
What’s important to remember about the Cybercab event is that Tesla will continue to prioritize safety and the rollout will likely be slow, just as it has been with Robotaxi.
One of the biggest complaints about Robotaxi is vehicle population, and the fact that the wait for a ride, at least in some instances, has been longer than most want to admit.
It will take time for this project to truly scale. It will take time for Tesla to roll this out in a large fashion. The important thing to note is that they are doing it, and they’re doing it with a vehicle that is completely engineered and built internally. That’s something no other ride-hailing service can say.
Elon Musk recently restated a fact that still defines SpaceX’s origin story: if Falcon 1’s fourth launch had failed, the company would not exist. The comment answered a reminder that after three consecutive losses, SpaceX had money for only one more attempt.
On X, Peter Diamandis said that the present-day acknowledgement of SpaceX’s success does not discount the rough start the company had. “Almost nobody remembers that Elon’s first rocket failed three times, and there was money for exactly only one more attempt.”
Musk said, “If the 4th launch had failed, SpaceX would not exist.”
If the 4th launch had failed, SpaceX would not exist
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) August 30, 2026
In late 2008, the firm was nearly out of cash. Another failure would have ended payroll, closed the Hawthorne factory, and left the Falcon 9 and Dragon programs as unfinished drawings.
The first flight lifted off from Omelek Island on 24 March 2006. Thirty-three seconds later, a corroded aluminum fitting on a fuel line leaked. Kerosene ignited around the Merlin engine, control was lost, and the vehicle came apart. The small DARPA payload, FalconSAT-2, survived the short flight only to land on a storage shed near the pad. Investigators later traced the fitting to a materials mix-up that should never have reached the rocket.
Flight 2, on 21 March 2007, looked far better at first. The first stage burned cleanly and handed off to the Kestrel-powered upper stage. The vehicle crossed 100 kilometers and reached a peak of about 289 kilometers. Then propellant slosh in the second-stage tank started a circular coning motion that grew until the engine shut down. Telemetry faded as the stage tumbled, and SpaceX had reached space but not orbit. Over the next year, the team redesigned everything from the ground up, including tanks, baffles, and the new regeneratively cooled Merlin 1C.
That engine flew on Flight 3 on 2 August 2008. The first stage performed almost perfectly and reached 217 kilometers. After main-engine cutoff, leftover fuel in the cooling channels produced a faint residual thrust, roughly 10 pounds per square inch of chamber pressure. On a Texas test stand, the effect was invisible beneath ambient air pressure. In vacuum it was enough to push the spent first stage back into the second stage after separation. The stages collided, the upper stage spun, and the mission was lost. Musk later said a slightly longer delay before staging would have saved the flight.
Six weeks later, the team assembled Flight 4 from remaining parts and flew it on 28 September 2008 at 23:15 UTC. The payload was Ratsat, a 165-kilogram aluminum mass simulator built in-house. Staging was delayed so residual thrust could decay. The Kestrel ignited, the fairing split away, and nine and a half minutes after liftoff the vehicle was in orbit. After a coast, the second stage restarted, settling into a 621-by-643-kilometer path at 9.35 degrees inclination. Falcon 1 became the first privately developed liquid-fueled rocket to reach Earth orbit. Musk called the insertion “middle of the bull’s-eye.”
SpaceX restores a Falcon 1 rocket for 10th anniversary of first launch success
That success unlocked NASA’s Commercial Resupply Services award later that year. Without it, there would have been no Falcon 9, no reusable first stages, and no Dragon cargo or crew flights to the International Space Station. Launch prices would have remained far higher. Starlink’s constellation would not exist; broadband from low Earth orbit would still be a paper concept.
Ride-share markets, high launch cadence, and the current pace of lunar and Mars hardware would be years behind. Communications, Earth observation, and the cost of putting anything into space would look more like the 2000s than the 2020s.
One extra second of residual thrust in August 2008 would have written a different decade.
SpaceX tells the FCC that Starship Flight 14 is going to orbit
Tesla Cybercab Event: what to expect from Austin
