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
Grok Bot users hit with weekly limits early, Elon Musk explains what happened
Elon Musk said weeks ago during SpaceX’s third-quarter earnings call that the company’s Grok Bot, its autonomous AI Agent platform, was showing “the fastest growth of a product” that he’d ever seen in his life.
Now, SpaceXSI is scaling back Grok Bot users’ weekly limits, much to the surprise of those who have relied on it to take away monotonous tasks in their lives.
Elon Musk’s terse November 1 reply on X captured a sharp tension in the early days of agentic AI. Responding to a user who asked for a Grok Bot usage reset after hitting 100 percent with four days still left on the weekly cycle, Musk wrote: “The cost of serving Grok Bot was unsustainably high relative to revenue.”
@DogecoinNorway The cost of serving Grok Bot was unsustainably high relative to revenue
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 1, 2026
The post arrived amid a wave of similar complaints from paying subscribers whose meters had jumped unexpectedly toward or to the limit, sometimes overnight and with little corresponding activity. It also stood in clear contrast to statements Musk had made only days and weeks earlier.
On the SpaceX third-quarter earnings call in mid-to-late October, Musk had described Grok Bot in almost the opposite terms. He called it “the fastest growth of a product that I’ve ever seen in my life” and said he had “never seen anything grow this fast.”
Company figures put paid weekly users at roughly 800,000 earlier in the month, more than doubling over the prior period. Daily active users had climbed from under 100,000 in early September to over 600,000 by late October.
Musk emphasized that the product has no free tier and that users appear to be getting real value beyond what they pay. In other remarks, he noted that usage per user was rising rather than declining, the opposite of the usual decay pattern for new software.
Grok Bot, launched around August, functions as an always-available agent with its own persistent cloud computer; it can schedule, research, shop, browse, and execute multi-step workflows even after the user steps away. Access is bundled into X subscription tiers (roughly $30, $100, and $200 per month) and certain Cursor plans, drawing from shared weekly usage pools whose exact sizes have not been publicly detailed.
The economics of that model are what Musk’s November 1 post put in the spotlight. Agentic systems burn far more compute than ordinary chatbot exchanges. Each task can trigger repeated model calls, tool use, web actions, and sustained background work.
When growth is as rapid as Musk celebrated, the absolute compute bill scales quickly even if average revenue per user stays fixed under flat monthly subscriptions. Industry observers noted the opportunity cost as well: the same GPUs can be rented to other AI labs at higher rates.
A simple back-of-the-envelope comparison circulating after the post illustrated the gap: if every reported daily user paid the top tier, annualized subscription revenue would still be modest relative to the scale of compute infrastructure SpaceX is building and leasing to companies like Anthropic.
Some users also reported possible dashboard anomalies around the same period, though Musk’s framing treated the underlying cost-revenue imbalance as the core issue rather than a pure metering glitch.
The juxtaposition is the core of this exchange. Within roughly two weeks of publicly framing Grok Bot as an unprecedented success with strong unit economics and no free tier, Musk acknowledged that serving the same product had become unsustainable relative to the revenue it generates.
For the broader industry, the episode underscores a structural challenge of the agent era: demand is real and growing faster than many expected, yet the cost of fulfilling that demand through always-on, multi-step agents can outrun subscription pricing before companies can adjust limits, introduce metered billing, or raise prices.
Musk’s reply did not promise an immediate reset or higher allowances; it simply stated the constraint. In doing so, it supplied a rare, explicit public data point on the unit economics of a high-profile AI agent just as adoption numbers were still being celebrated as the fastest in Musk’s experience.
The tension between rapid, paid growth and the compute required to deliver it is now on the record.
News
Tesla owners who tap Emergency Drive Away for fun are in for a surprise
Tapping Activate on Tesla’s Emergency Drive Away reportedly triggers a $539 service bill without moving.
Tesla owners who press Activate on Emergency Drive Away may be on the hook for a service bill even if their car never leaves the Supercharger stall.
Yaro, who posts about Tesla service cases on X as @Tutrifour, said a customer called after tapping Activate while still plugged into a Supercharger. The owner was about to pull away, remembered the cable was still connected and stopped. The car never moved, but the touchscreen showed a red alert reading “Emergency Drive Away has been activated” with “Service is required” underneath. A Service Mode screenshot showed the active alert BMS_a228_EmergencyDriveAwayServiceRequired, which Yaro said only Tesla Service can clear.
Here is a lesson to Tesla owners. Don’t press Activate on the new Emergency Drive Away feature on your Tesla because service charges $539 to inspect the charge port and to clear the alert. Yes, even if you didn’t move the car an inch. https://t.co/NZJENw4SQv
— Yaro (@Tutrifour) October 30, 2026
The cost of clearing it was the bigger surprise. “Don’t press Activate on the new Emergency Drive Away feature on your Tesla because service charges $539 to inspect the charge port and to clear the alert. Yes, even if you didn’t move the car an inch,” Yaro wrote. The $539 figure comes from that single case, and Tesla has not published a set price for the inspection or commented on the post. Yaro also noted that the car would still charge with the alert on screen.
Tesla launched Emergency Drive Away on October 1 with software update 2026.38.3, letting drivers pull away from a U.S. Supercharger with the cable still attached, as Teslarati reported. To use it, a driver shifts into Drive while connected, holds the brake and taps Activate. The prompt warns that driving with the cable connected will damage the vehicle and the Supercharger, and that short camera recordings will be shared with Tesla.
Tesla Charging has been clear about what follows a real activation. Repairs to a Supercharger stall can run up to $25,000 depending on the site, a service visit for the car’s charge port is mandatory, and deliberate misuse “will invoke additional penalties.” What the company had not spelled out is that the service requirement is triggered the moment Activate is pressed, not the moment the cable breaks away.
From an engineering standpoint, that is the cautious choice. Once Activate is pressed, the car cannot be sure the charge port latch was not stressed, so flagging it for inspection removes the guesswork. It also means the button carries a price on its own, which is a stronger deterrent against casual use than any warning screen.
Customer called because they have an active alert after tapping ACTIVATE on the new Emergency Drive Away feature. They didn’t actually drive away but were about to until they “remembered” they had the charge cable connected.
This alert can only be cleared by Tesla Service. https://t.co/SkHyJJPFwU
— Yaro (@Tutrifour) October 28, 2026
The report follows the feature’s first known real world use, when a driver in Austin during F1 weekend appeared to trigger it by accident and dragged the Supercharger cable along with the car. The Reddit user who filmed it said the driver seemed to have only half read the prompts.
For owners, the takeaway is to treat the red prompt as a stop sign. If it appears after shifting out of Park by mistake, shift back and unplug the normal way from the touchscreen, the Tesla app or the button on the charge handle. Activate is meant for moments when staying at the stall is the bigger risk, and Tesla is now pricing it that way.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk calls Earth’s data centers “peanuts” next to what SpaceX is planning in orbit
Elon Musk says SpaceX capex efficiency is underestimated as orbital data centers loom by 2028.
Elon Musk is pushing back on one of the biggest worries hanging over SpaceX stock. In a reply on X on Sunday, Musk said the company’s capital expenditure efficiency is severely underestimated. He was responding to a Milk Road Stocks post citing analyst Kyle Reidhead, who estimates SpaceX will need to spend roughly $470 billion over the next five quarters.
Reidhead built that figure around the target SpaceX set on its third quarter earnings call: 13 gigawatts or more of compute by the end of 2027. In his breakdown, Nvidia captures 83 to 89 percent of the spending. SpaceX ended the quarter with 1.7 GW of nameplate compute and guided to $35 billion to $40 billion in fourth quarter capex, as Teslarati reported.
Musk did not attach a number to his claim, but the earnings call shows the argument. CFO Bret Johnsen said new compute currently pays for itself in under a year at today’s pricing, and Musk said that window could shrink to six months next year. Using that pace, Reidhead argues about $230 billion of the $470 billion could come from operating cash flow and about $60 billion from SpaceX’s roughly $90 billion cash pile, leaving around $180 billion to borrow. Musk confirmed last week that SpaceX had already closed a new $40 billion debt raise to buy GPUs.
The ground buildout is not the end goal. It is what is meant to pay for the move to orbit. Replying on Friday to charts built from Sequoia partner Shaun Maguire’s SpaceX model, Musk wrote that “Terrestrial compute will be peanuts compared to orbital compute,” adding that orbital compute deployed per month “probably exceeds terrestrial around the end of 2028 and then far exceeds it in 2029.”
Maguire’s model shows how steep that path is. It has capex climbing from $88 billion this year to $290 billion in 2027 and $369 billion in 2028, with SpaceX burning $77.8 billion in cash this year and $122.6 billion next year before turning $114.9 billion cash positive in 2028. Musk’s response to the model was, “I think we can do better.”
The orbital half runs through Starmind. SpaceX plans to operate up to 1 million AI satellites flying in clusters of about 10, linked by roughly 10 terabits of bandwidth, with deployment of thousands of units starting as soon as late 2027 out of its Gigasat factory in Bastrop, Texas, according to SpaceX’s space safety page. Musk has said each Starmind spacecraft will carry more than 250 kW of solar power.
Getting there depends on launch volume. Maguire’s model assumes 250 Starship flights in 2028, up from two this year and 38 next year. The nearer test is financial: SpaceX guided to $33 billion to $37 billion in first quarter 2027 revenue, more than double the $14.58 billion it booked in Q3, and Musk reposted that guidance again on Sunday morning.