News
SpaceX’s spectacular USSF-67 Falcon Heavy launch in photos
On January 15th, SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy rocket lifted off for the second time in 75 days to launch another batch of US military payloads into orbits tens of thousands of kilometers above Earth’s surface.
Six and a half hours later, the US Space Systems Command (SSC) confirmed that Falcon Heavy had again completed the exceptionally difficult launch without issue. To deliver the USSF-67 mission’s payloads directly to geosynchronous orbit (GSO), the giant SpaceX rocket had to sacrifice one of its potentially reusable boosters and complete a complex six-hour ballet of rolls, burns, and spacecraft deployments. And for the second time in a row, Falcon Heavy did so without apparent issue.
In an SSC press release [PDF], Maj. Gen. Stephen Purdy, program executive officer for Assured Access to Space, said that the group “had another fantastic launch today on a Falcon Heavy.” He added that “while the launch itself was impressive,” he was “most proud of the fact that we placed important [national] capabilities into space.” And an impressive launch it certainly was.
The update that's rolling out to the fleet makes full use of the front and rear steering travel to minimize turning circle. In this case a reduction of 1.6 feet just over the air— Wes (@wmorrill3) April 16, 2024
A Falcon (Heavy) spectacle
As previously discussed, USSF-67 was Falcon Heavy’s first twilight launch. The extraordinary cadence of SpaceX’s workhorse Falcon 9 rocket, which Falcon Heavy is derived from, caused twilight launches and the incredible light shows they can produce to become a fairly routine phenomena. But just under five years after its February 2018 debut, there had still never been a Falcon Heavy launch ‘jellyfish’ or ‘nebula.’ That thankfully changed on Sunday.
The rocket lifted off just ten or so minutes after sunset and soared into the fading purple skies. Those skies were still relatively bright at ground-level, reducing the amount of contrast, but the resulting light show was still spectacular as Falcon Heavy and its immense exhaust plume ascended back into the sunlight. The artificial sunrise lit up that pillar-like plume with the colors of sunrise and, eventually, bright daylight.
Close-up views enabled by tracking telescopes captured the true drama, which began shortly after Falcon Heavy’s twin side boosters separated from the rocket’s main core stage and upper stage, flipped around, and ignited their engines to fly back to the Florida coast they’d only just lifted off from. As the nine-engine center core continued towards space, each booster fired up one and then three Merlin 1D engines for their boostback burns.
A view from Astronomy Live captured the moment of boostback burn ignition, during which the side boosters visibly blasted ‘craters’ the Falcon Heavy center core’s much more powerful plume. As those plumes interacted, the fluid dynamics and light produced by multiple Merlin 1D engines combined to create chaotic whisps of orange, red, and yellow – akin to an exploding nebula. The moments prior were also spectacular as the two side boosters, lit up by direct sunlight against the nearly black sky, began gently floating away from the center core and spinning around with bursts from several nitrogen gas thrusters – a brief moment of serenity before the violence of engine ignition.
On a chariot of fire
But as Maj. Gen. Purdy noted, the purpose of USSF-67 – spectacle aside – was to carry a number of important payloads into orbit.
“After both side boosters touched down, SpaceX ended its live coverage at the request of the Space Force, reiterating the mission’s secretive customer and nature. The USSF hasn’t confirmed much about the USSF-67 mission’s payloads, but Falcon Heavy is known to be carrying a geostationary communications relay satellite called CBAS-2 and likely built by Boeing. CBAS-2 is joined by Northrop Grumman’s third Long Duration Propulsive EELV or LDPE-3A, a combination of a propulsive kick stage and a satellite. LDPE-3A is carrying a collection of rideshare satellites and payloads and is designed to operate for months in orbit. Using USSF-44 as a guide, the total USSF-67 payload could weigh roughly 3.75 to 4.75 tons (8,250-10,500 lb).”
Teslarati.com – January 15th, 2023
The same SSC press release provides more detail, noting that LDPE-3A carries two hosted payloads – Catcher and WASSAT. Catcher is a space weather instrument developed by the Aerospace Corporation, while WASSAT is a prototype [PDF] of a wide-angle observation instrument designed to track other satellites in GSO. LDPE is also hosting “three payloads developed by the Space Rapid Capabilities Office (SRCO),” including “two operational prototypes for enhanced situational awareness, and an operational prototype crypto/interface encryption payload providing secure space-to-ground communications capability.”
Two down, one to go
For Falcon Heavy side boosters B1064 and B1065, both of which supported USSF-44 and USSF-67, their missions are far from over. Their second successful side-by-side landing has cleared the boosters to be reused on a third US military launch called USSF-52. Originally known as AFSPC-52, the mission was Falcon Heavy’s first operational US military launch contract and the first time the rocket beat competitor United Launch Alliance (ULA) during a competitive procurement.
Next Spaceflight reports that USSF-52 is scheduled to launch no earlier than April 10th, 2023, less than three months from now. Once that mission is complete, Falcon Heavy will have no more US military missions on contract, although more will almost certainly be rewarded sooner than later. USSF-52 is sandwiched between two other Falcon Heavy launches. Next Spaceflight also reports that Falcon Heavy could launch the ViaSat-3 communications satellite as early as March 2023 and the Jupiter-3 (EchoStar 24) communications satellite as early as May 2023, making for a busy 90 days.
For that trio to happen as scheduled, SpaceX will have to beat Falcon Heavy’s record 75-day turnaround, which has coincidentally (?) occurred twice: first between Arabsat 6A and STP-2, and again between USSF-44 and USSF-67. Including USSF-67, SpaceX has up to five Falcon Heavy launches scheduled this year.
Elon Musk
The Starship moon landing number NASA and Elon Musk can’t agree on
Musk disputes NASA estimate of 22 Starship launches for Moon landing, predicting 6 to 8.
Elon Musk is disputing a new NASA safety panel estimate of how many Starship launches it will take to put astronauts on the Moon, saying the real number will be less than half the panel’s figure.
On Thursday, NASA’s Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel held its quarterly public meeting. Panel member Charlie Precourt, a former NASA astronaut, flagged the fueling process for SpaceX’s lunar lander as a major risk for Artemis IV, the mission planned to land a crew on the Moon in 2028. “We need to keep our eyes on numerous required fuelings for the lander,” Precourt said, according to Ars Technica. “I think the last estimate is around 22 flights.”
Ars Technica’s Eric Berger posted the comment on X, and Musk replied. “That’s way too high,” Musk wrote. “Actual number will be more like 6 to 8.”
The disagreement comes down to a basic problem with sending a ship as large as Starship to the Moon. Starship burns nearly all of its propellant just reaching Earth orbit, so it cannot continue on to the Moon without stopping for a refill. SpaceX’s answer is a gas station in space. First, a Starship that works as a storage tank, called a depot, is launched into orbit. Then a series of tanker Starships launch one at a time, dock with the depot and pump their leftover propellant into it. Once the depot is full, the lunar lander version of Starship launches, docks, fills up and heads for the Moon.
Every tanker trip is its own full rocket launch, which is why the count matters. More launches mean more time, more cost and more chances for something to go wrong before astronauts ever leave Earth. Berger estimated that even if SpaceX reaches twice weekly Starship launches by the end of 2027, filling a depot at the panel’s number would still take roughly three months.
How many tankers are needed depends mostly on how much propellant each one can carry to orbit and how much is lost along the way. Starship’s fuel and oxygen are stored at extremely cold temperatures, and some of it slowly boils off while waiting in orbit. More is lost in each transfer. NASA appears to be working from what Starship can lift today, while Musk’s range assumes a more capable rocket.
Musk has pushed back on higher counts before. In 2021, after a government document suggested 16 launches, he called that “extremely unlikely” and said eight tankers would be the most required.
Much of the answer depends on hardware SpaceX has not finished flying. As Teslarati noted earlier this year, the company plans to carry out the refueling process with its upgraded V3 Starship, and Precourt described Artemis IV as carrying “a large number of firsts.” He also praised NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman’s team for working to clear obstacles for both SpaceX and Blue Origin, whose Blue Moon lander does not rely on orbital refueling for its first mission.
Elon Musk
Tesla’s secretive “Project Crystal Sun” gets a big green light in Texas
Fort Bend County approved four incentive agreements Thursday for Tesla’s proposed $10.1 billion solar factory.
Fort Bend County commissioners on Thursday approved a package of tax incentives for Tesla’s proposed $10.1 billion solar cell factory near Needville, Texas, giving the company one of the last local approvals it needs before it decides where to build. All four Tesla agreements passed 4 to 0.
The votes covered a property tax abatement inside Reinvestment Zone No. 34, a Chapter 381 economic development agreement, a foreign trade zone non-objection paired with payments in lieu of certain taxes, and a separate payment in lieu of taxes “true up” agreement, according to agenda notes from the Fort Bend Commissioners Court meeting.
The project, known internally as “Project Crystal Sun,” would make solar cells and finished modules on roughly 3,000 acres near FM 762 and FM 1994, south of the Brazos River. As Teslarati reported when the filing first surfaced in August, Tesla’s application under the state’s JETI Act splits the investment into $1.5 billion in real property and $8.6 billion in equipment, with 9,712 permanent jobs projected by 2033 and commercial operations targeted for the first quarter of 2029. The plant would handle the full chain from ingot and wafer production through cell testing.
Inside Tesla’s secretive $10 Billion “Project Crystal Sun” filing
Thursday’s approval does not lock in the site. Tesla has told the Texas Comptroller it is still weighing other locations, and site selection adviser David Dennison told Lamar Consolidated ISD trustees in September that the race had narrowed to Fort Bend and one out of state rival with a “very compelling package,” according to the Houston Chronicle. Tesla hopes to decide before the end of 2026, and the incentives still need sign off from the Comptroller and the Governor’s office.
Local officials have now done nearly everything within their control. Commissioners created the reinvestment zone in an August 24 special meeting, with Interim County Judge Daniel Wong formally withdrawing himself over his engineering firm’s past work with Tesla. Lamar CISD trustees voted 7 to 0 on September 15 to advance a JETI agreement that would tax Tesla’s qualifying property at 50 percent of its value for maintenance and operations from 2029 through 2038.
The plant lines up with a target Elon Musk set on Tesla’s Q4 2025 earnings call in January, when he said the company would “work toward getting 100 GW a year of solar cell production, integrating across the entire supply chain from raw materials all the way to finished solar panels.” In March, Tesla was reported to be negotiating a $2.9 billion purchase of Chinese solar manufacturing equipment bound for Texas. The Houston area already hosts Tesla’s Megafactory in Brookshire, where Megapack 3 production has started. Tesla said on its Q3 call that Megapack supply for 2027 is nearly sold out, and Musk wrote on X Thursday that the company is “increasing production of Megapacks as much as possible,” as demand from data centers climbs.
Tesla revealed plans to develop its own maps internally to fix Navigation issues and give owners more control over their routing.
On the company’s Q3 2026 Earnings Call, a question was asked about FSD Navigation issues, particularly speed limit recognition, parking, and routing. These are issues that surface from version to version and seem to be seriously challenging for Tesla’s AI team to resolve.
Tesla’s Head of AI, Ashok Elluswamy, said in response to the question:
“You’re totally right that we shouldn’t be depending on external people’s maps. So we are building our own maps, but not like the same way as OneMoreMap. We are building an entirely new architecture with essentially AI-based mapping and navigation.”
He continued:
“It’s going to be super awesome. It’s going to be integrated with voice. You can talk to it, ask for different routes. It’s going to learn your personalized preferences, plus the fleet preferences. The collective intelligence of all the cars is going to flow into making the maps and navigation super cool.”
Elluswamy said this issue should be confronted, and the mapping should be available for people by the time the v15 release starts deploying to customers.
“And over the next several months,” he added, “it’s just going to take over all of the navigation functions, parking, destination handling. And it will know you better than you know yourself in some regard for the driving task, and then handle it fully.”
Tesla Summon got insanely good in FSD v14.3.2 — Navigation? Not so much
Navigation is perhaps the most notable complaint with FSD, and although it has gotten better, it is still flawed. Much of the time, FSD will take people on routes that are not preferred by the driver, but Tesla tried to combat this with a routing feature in the Summer 2026 Update.
Tesla currently relies on Google for map data, but it is sort of counterintuitive to believe the company would rely on a third party for this. These improvements will be welcome, as routing and navigation have been such a pain point for so many owners for so long.
Quotes via Motley Fool
The Starship moon landing number NASA and Elon Musk can’t agree on
Tesla’s secretive “Project Crystal Sun” gets a big green light in Texas
