News
SpaceX on a roll with latest small satellite launch contract wins
Rideshare organize Exolaunch has announced a multi-spacecraft launch contract with SpaceX, continuing a streak of success enjoyed by the launch company’s Smallsat Program over the last several months.
While Exolaunch declined to confirm the mass of the payload or the number of satellites it manifested on a SpaceX Smallsat Program launch, the German company has likely arranged for 5-10 customer satellites to travel to orbit on Falcon 9. Known as a launch services provider, Exolaunch is effectively a middleman company tasked with connecting small satellites – typically cubesats in the 1-50 kg (1-125 lb) range – to rideshare launch opportunities on much larger rockets.
At face value, SpaceX’s Smallsat Program offers an extremely poor deal for individual cubesat owners on the market for launch services. However, through a growing number of flight-proven organizers like Exolaunch, Nanoracks, and others, markets and actual hardware are being developed to give the many hundreds or thousands of potential customers a cheap and reliable way to space. Uncertainties undoubtedly remain but SpaceX appears to be well on its way to securing a range of relatively valuable keystone customers, potentially becoming the go-to option for smallsat launches.
While it sounds deceptively simple, it’s looking more and more like SpaceX’s Smallsat Program has been an extremely strategic and forward-looking play, setting the company up to be a bit like the spaceflight equivalent of an ocean freight provider. Effectively the invisible backbone of the global economy, modern shipping is incredibly efficient and effective in large part because of the adoption of standardized shipping containers.
Just like oceanic shipping, the cost of transporting an entire shipping container is uneconomical for the vast majority of customers in search of logistics services. Instead, 3rd parties typically acquire space and then sell portions of each container’s volume inside to smaller customers. Companies like Exolaunch, Nanoracks, and more are essentially trying to become those third parties, albeit in a world where the standard shipping container has yet to be developed.
Exolaunch’s ‘Exopod’ is one of several such orbital-shipping-crates-in-waiting and will fly on SpaceX’s first dedicated rideshare mission, scheduled to launch no earlier than (NET) December 2020. Critically, providers like Exolaunch – tasked with deploying multiple customer satellites in orbit – can require an overall payload heavy enough for SpaceX’s pricing to be spectacularly competitive. Assuming an Exopod is ~50 kg and can store four 3U cubesats weighing ~10 kg each, Exolaunch would have to pay SpaceX just ~$1M to launch a full pod.
Add a 25% overhead for Exolaunch’s own costs and those four satellites could reach orbit for something like ~$300,000 apiece. In reality, it’s likely possibly for costs to be even lower, but it serves to show how 3rd-party service providers can offer prices lower than the launch company’s own catalog.
Aside from Exolaunch, SpaceX has won several smallsat launch contracts from Nanoracks (partially a services provider like Exolaunch), Momentus (a space tug company with more than a dozen of its own satellite customers), Kepler (an Internet of Things satellite constellation company), as well as several smaller orders. SpaceX’s growing relationship with Momentus is particularly interesting as the latter company’s goal is to develop cheap orbital tugs, deploying satellites at the exact orbits they want even if launched as part of a rideshare. Momentus has already bought slots for its Vigoride space tugs on five SpaceX rideshare launches, beginning as early as December 2020.
Ultimately, while the economics of rideshare launches on vehicles as large as Falcon 9 remain extremely unforgiving, SpaceX appears to be in it for the long haul and has certainly won an impressive number of launch contracts in just the last few months. SpaceX’s first Smallsat Program rideshare could happen as early as June 2020, hitching a ride on one of the two-dozen internal Starlink missions planned this year. The first dedicated rideshare is working towards its own December 2020 launch debut.
Tesla’s long-standing saga regarding its door handles and a manual release has entered its latest chapter, and as a result, a big change is coming.
On Friday, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) denied Tesla’s petition that was seeking a defect investigation into roughly 180,000 Model 3 vehicles for an issue involving the emergency mechanical door release.
🚨 The NHTSA denied a petition from Tesla that would have thrown out concerns regarding its door handles.
NHTSA said Tesla’s petition did not present evidence of a safety-related defect warranting an investigation. The agency said a rulemaking process would be a better strategy. pic.twitter.com/j6PzUBM1mT
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 24, 2026
NHTSA said that Tesla’s petition did not present evidence of a safety-related defect in the door handles or their emergency releases. Instead, the agency determined that it would rather solve the issue of the lack of labeling or location of emergency mechanical door releases and the federal safety rules that govern them.
Essentially, the NHTSA wants to create and enforce rules that would require automakers to make emergency door latch releases more clearly labeled in a car. Despite a Tesla having manual door releases on all four passenger doors, many people do not know they exist or how they work.
Tesla addresses door handle complaints with simple engineering fix
In recent times, Tesla has faced some criticism involving its door handles, specifically because some occupants have reported that they are unable to exit their vehicles after losing power. The door handles on a Tesla are electronically operated, but in the event that the 12V battery dies, there is a manual release that can be used.
The NHTSA only identified a single complaint involving the mechanical door releases: a 2022 Model 3 owner said the release was concealed and unlabeled after the vehicle lost power after a front-end collision. It has also already started to create a separate rulemaking process to make emergency door-egress systems more obvious.
It should be noted that all Teslas have mechanical emergency door releases, but they are placed in various locations as the vehicles have aged and been redesigned from year to year. Refer to the safety manual for your vehicle if you have any confusion about where the emergency releases are and how they work.
News
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 faces wrath of the Texas skies
SpaceX pushed Starship Flight 13 to Friday, blaming weather instead of the previous engine issues.
SpaceX called off Thursday’s launch attempt of Starship Flight 13, pushing the mission to Friday because of weather tied to Tropical Storm Bertha. The company confirmed the delay on X, noting “Now targeting Friday, July 24 for Starship’s thirteenth flight test, due to weather. A key objective for the flight test is to get clear imagery from the ground of Starship’s heatshield as it flies at a higher dynamic pressure during ascent, which won’t be possible with today’s weather conditions.”
This is the second delay for Flight 13 in two weeks. SpaceX first tried to launch the mission on July 16, but the countdown ended in an automated abort at T-0 when four of Super Heavy Booster 20’s 33 Raptor engines failed to ignite. Musk said at the time that two Raptors would need to be removed and replaced, as Teslarati reported. The company spent the following week destacking Ship 40 and Booster 20, swapping engines, and running leak checks before restacking the vehicle on Pad 2 Wednesday night, according to Spaceflight Now’s live coverage.
Unlike the engine problem, Thursday’s delay has nothing to do with the hardware. SpaceX wants clean footage of Starship’s heat shield captured from the ground as the vehicle flies through max dynamic pressure, something the storm’s cloud cover over South Texas would not allow. The company said visibility should improve for Friday’s attempt, with the same 90 minute window opening at 5:45 p.m. CT.
Flight 13 will be the second outing for the V3 versions of Starship and Super Heavy, following their debut on Flight 12 in May. The mission carries 20 production Starlink V3 satellites, the first time SpaceX has flown operational satellites rather than mass simulators on Starship. Six of those satellites are fitted with cameras to inspect the heat shield from a different angle during ascent, giving engineers a second data source beyond the ground imagery the weather is currently blocking.
Booster 20 will attempt a boostback burn and a splashdown landing burn in the Gulf of America, while Ship 40 follows a suborbital trajectory toward a landing in the Indian Ocean. The flight plan largely mirrors Flight 12, though the booster will run a more aggressive ascent burn after max Q this time, and the ship’s heat shield includes load sensing tiles meant to measure stress at the higher dynamic pressure SpaceX is targeting.
If Friday’s attempt succeeds, Flight 13 could be the last suborbital test in the program. SpaceX is already looking to push for an orbital flight on Flight 14.
Tesla stock (NASDAQ: TSLA) endured one of its sharpest single-day declines in years on July 23, tumbling approximately 14.5 percent and closing near $320 after opening the session around $374. The drop erased more than $140 billion in market value amid heavy trading volume and left the shares at multi-week lows.
The sell-off followed the company’s second-quarter 2026 results, released the previous evening. Tesla reported record revenue of $28.2 billion, up 26 percent year over year, driven by a Q2-record 480,126 vehicle deliveries. Energy storage deployments also rose strongly.
Tesla (TSLA) Q2 2026 earnings results: miss on EPS, beat on revenue
Yet profitability disappointed sharply. Operating income fell 57 percent to $398 million, compressing the operating margin to just 1.4 percent. Non-GAAP earnings per share came in at $0.33, well below the roughly $0.53 analysts had expected. Free cash flow turned negative by $1.1 billion as capital expenditures surged 142 percent to $5.8 billion, largely tied to accelerated spending on artificial intelligence, robotics, and autonomous systems.
The losses on capex were expected, as Tesla said it would be spending heavily in 2026.
Investors also reacted to lingering uncertainty surrounding key product timelines. During the Earnings Call, management reiterated ambitions for Robotaxi deployment and the Optimus humanoid robot, but offered limited new concrete milestones, renewing questions about execution pace that have long accompanied Tesla’s ambitious roadmap.
The magnitude of the decline places it among Tesla’s more severe one-day percentage losses since its 2010 initial public offering. Historically, the two largest single-day drops (split-adjusted) remain September 8, 2020, when shares fell 21.1 percent amid broader market volatility and valuation concerns, and January 13, 2012, with a 19.3 percent plunge during the company’s early growth struggles.
Other notable declines include an 18.6 percent drop on March 16, 2020, at the onset of pandemic-related market turmoil. Thursday’s move ranks roughly ninth on the all-time list but stands out as the steepest in more than a year.
Despite the short-term pain, Tesla’s long-term trajectory has repeatedly recovered from such volatility. The latest results underscore both the strength of its core automotive and energy businesses and the near-term costs of heavy investment in next-generation technologies.
Tesla door handle saga gets its latest chapter and a big change is coming
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 faces wrath of the Texas skies
