News
DeepSpace: Virgin Galactic and Blue Origin banter about the fine print of suborbital tourism
Welcome to the sixth edition of our new newsletter, DeepSpace! Each Tuesday, I’ll be taking a deep-dive into the most exciting developments in commercial space, from satellites and rockets to everything in between. If you’d like to receive DeepSpace and all of our newsletters and membership benefits,
Just shy of two months into 2019, the new year has been marked by a distinct focus on human spaceflight. Most of that focus has centered (as it should) on the relatively imminent launch debut of both SpaceX’s Crew Dragon and Boeing’s Starliner, crewed spacecraft designed and built to carry astronauts into orbit for NASA.
However, beyond SpaceX and Boeing, a considerable amount of noise is being made about the labors and relative progress of companies like Blue Origin and Virgin Galactic, both primarily focused on building a suborbital tourism market with their New Shepard and SpaceShipTwo launch vehicles. Coming as no surprise from companies aiming to create a sustainable market for a very expensive consumer product, both products have been dragged through a torturous maze of marketing hype in a process that has not really done the serious endeavor of human spaceflight any favors.
The Shepard and the Ship
- Virgin Galactic’s launch vehicle provider The Spaceship Company has been working to develop a suborbital platform to launch humans since the early 2000s, incorporated after billionaire Paul Allen funded a group of companies that ultimately won the Ansari X Prize in 2004.
- The Virgin/TSC approach involves a carrier aircraft (Known as White Knight Two) and a much smaller rocket plane (SpaceShipTwo) that is carried up to ~30,000 feet (9 km) before dropping and igniting its engine.
- SpaceShipTwo is meant to reach a maximum altitude of around 300,000 feet (~90 km) at a top speed of roughly Mach 3 (1000 m/s, 2200 mph) before gliding back to land on the same runway.
- In 2014, a combination of bad aeronautical design and pilot error triggered the in-flight failure of the first SpaceShipTwo, killing one of its two pilots. A member of the NTSB board that investigated the failure stated that Scale Composites (one of TSC’s parent companies) “put all their eggs in the basket of the pilots [flying the vehicle] correctly.”
- In a February 2019 video, Virgin Galactic CEO George Whitesides noted that “many aircraft are moving to being less piloted over time [but] our vehicle really is piloted to space.”
- SpaceShipTwo most recently launched on February 22nd.
- Blue Origin has yet to launch an actual human on New Shepard, a small, reusable single-stage rocket designed to loft a separate passenger capsule to approximately 100 km (330,000 ft).
- New Shepard has conducted ten launches since its 2015 debut, most of which saw the crew capsule and booster approximately reach that nominal 100 km apogee and nine of which concluded with a successful landing of the rocket’s booster.
- Capable of carrying up to six passengers, the Crew Capsule features a built-in abort motor that has been successfully tested, as well as a parachute system for a relatively soft landing at end-of-mission.
“Spacecraft” and “astronauts”
- Aside from the generally impressive technology itself and the undeniable challenges and risks of launch humans on fueled rockets, both Blue Origin’s New Shepard and Virgin Galactic’s SpaceShipTwo exist – albeit with different weights – to cater to a new market, suborbital or “space” tourism.
- While NASA is taking advantage of the opportunities to test small experiments with both vehicles as a partial platform, the real goal of both vehicles is to routinely launch paying customers.
- While Blue Origin has yet to announce ticket pricing, Virgin Galactic has priced their offering at $250,000 per person. In both cases, the end result will likely be a six-figure sum in return for an experience that should last no more than 10-60 minutes from start to finish, excluding buildup from screening and whatever training is deemed necessary.
- In other words, short of cases involving charity, tickets on New Shepard and SpaceShipTwo will almost indefinitely be reserved for less than 1% of humanity, those with income around $1M or more per year. This is by no means a bad thing and is, in fact, a proven first or second step in the direction of democratizing exotic or expensive technologies like air travel, computers, and even electric cars (namely Teslas).
- However, both companies are laser-focused on branding their vehicles as spacecraft and their passengers as astronauts, with Virgin Galactic being the worst offender in this regard.
- Aside from literally calling its 600+ prospective customers “Future Astronauts”, Virgin Galactic uses every chance it gets to hammer home its claim that SpaceShipTwo is a commercial spacecraft and its pilots true licensed, “wing”-ed astronauts.
- While passengers are not eligible for official FAA ‘astronauts’ wings’, it appears that Virgin will continue to market its passenger experience as one where customers will get to ‘travel to space’ and more or less become astronauts.
- Blue Origin describes its commercial offering as a “reusable suborbital rocket system designed to take astronauts and research payloads past the Kármán line – the internationally recognized boundary of space.”
- Both Blue and Virgin flights offer about ~4 minutes of weighlessness between launch and landing.
-
- Virgin Galactic Makes Space for Second Time in Ten Weeks with Three On Board
-
-
-
- For context, Alan Shepard – the US test pilot and namesake of New Shepard – was launched to an altitude of almost 190 km (120 mi) for what was recognized as the first US “spaceflight” and spent something like 5-10 minutes in microgravity and above the Karman Line (100 km).
- Used as a rough measure for a sort of fixed, arbitrary boundary between “Earth” and “Space”, reasonable arguments have been made in the last few years that the 100 km Karman Line could more accurately be placed around 70-90 km, in which case Virgin Galactic might actually be technically correct when saying that SpaceShipTwo and its passengers are traveling to space.
- Fewer than 570 humans in all of history have visited space (> 100 km), around 99.5% of which were astronauts that reached orbit. To call pilots of a spaceplane as distinctly suborbital as SpaceShipOne “astronauts” is palatable, particularly given the risks they face as test subjects and test pilots.
- However, to even hinting that tourists riding New Shepard or SpaceShipTwo to altitudes of ~80-100 kilometers are astronauts would do an immense disservice to those that pushed the limits of technology, risked their lives, or even died in pursuit of orbital spaceflight, the only kind of spaceflight with any significant utility.
- Much like cruise ship customers are not under the impression that they are coming along to ‘become sailors’, suborbital tourists are not astronauts. That being said, it’s not inaccurate to describe the experience they will have the privilege of being part of as something truly extraordinary, given that they will become one of a very select few humans to have actually launched on a rocket or seen the exaggerated curvature of Earth’s limb against the blackness of space.
- SpaceX’s first attempted orbital launch of Crew Dragon – a spacecraft designed to transport astronauts to and from the International Space Station – is set to occur as early as 2:49 am EST/07:49 UTC on March 2nd.
- This is the first truly serious date, thanks to the successful completion of a critical pre-launch review conducted by NASA and SpaceX.
- The second launch of Falcon Heavy could occur as early as late March
- Aside from DM-1 and Falcon Heavy Flight 2, it’s unclear what SpaceX mission will happen next, although a West Coast launch (the Radarsat Constellation Mission) is a strong candidate.
Mission Updates |
Photos of the Week:
After successfully sending the world’s first commercial lunar lander on its way to the Moon and placing Indonesian communications satellite PSN-6 in a high-energy Earth orbit, Falcon 9 B1048 completed its third launch and landing and returned to port on February 24th. The booster’s fourth mission, a Crew Dragon in-flight abort test, will likely destroy B1048, making this its last successful recovery. (c. Tom Cross)
The Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan (OTPP) stands to reap one of the most extraordinary returns in pension fund history thanks to a bold 2019 investment in SpaceX.
According to a recent report from The Globe and Mail, the Toronto-based fund invested roughly $300 million CAD (~$220 million USD at the time) in Elon Musk’s space company as its inaugural deal through the Teachers’ Innovation Platform.
At SpaceX’s anticipated $1.75 trillion IPO valuation, set for a mid-June debut on Nasdaq under ticker $SPCX, that stake could now be worth up to $11.6 billion USD. This would represent a roughly 50x return and easily become OTPP’s most successful single investment ever.
The fund manages $279 billion in assets for approximately 346,000 working and retired teachers in Ontario, potentially delivering an average boost of around $33,500 per member if fully realized.
SpaceX has filed its S-1 and plans to price shares at $135 each, aiming to raise a record $75 billion in what would be the largest IPO in history, surpassing Saudi Aramco. The company reported $18.67 billion in revenue for 2025, driven primarily by Starlink satellite internet growth and NASA contracts, though it continues to post significant losses tied to ambitious R&D in Starship and AI initiatives.
Important pieces moving forward include:
- Starlink Expansion: The satellite broadband service is scaling rapidly, targeting global connectivity, especially in underserved rural and remote areas. This segment offers massive recurring revenue potential as numbers climb.
- Starship and Reusability Leadership: SpaceX’s fully reusable Starship aims to slash launch costs dramatically, enabling frequent missions, Mars ambitions, and lucrative government/defense contracts. Success here could unlock exponential growth.
- AI and Diversification: Recent moves, including ties to xAI, position SpaceX in high-growth AI infrastructure, broadening beyond traditional aerospace.
- Validation Scrutiny: While the $1.75 trillion target excites investors, analysts like Morningstar value the company closer to $780 billion, citing high multiples (around 90x trailing revenue) and execution risks. A 180-day lockup period will prevent early investors like OTPP from selling immediately post-IPO.
The irony has not been lost on observers. Ontario’s government previously canceled a Starlink rural internet contract amid political tensions involving Musk, yet the pension fund’s savvy investment, made when SpaceX was valued around $33-36 billion, and Starlink was nascent, delivers outsized gains independent of politics.
For OTPP, this windfall strengthens its already solid 111 percent funding ratio and underscores the value of patient, innovation-focused capital allocation.
For SpaceX, the IPO marks a new chapter: greater transparency, access to public markets for talent retention and growth capital, and heightened pressure to deliver on its multi-planetary vision.
All eyes are fixed on whether SpaceX can justify its lofty valuation through sustained execution. For Ontario teachers, the returns are already stellar, but SpaceX, like other Musk companies in the past, has plenty of things to prove. Perhaps the most ideal person for the job is at the helm, hoping to bring the company to a massive valuation.
In a notable shift for electric vehicle perceptions, Tesla has emerged as a standout performer in the latest iSeeCars longevity study, which analyzed over 174 million used vehicles.
The data reveals that Tesla models have a 4.6 percent chance of reaching 250,000 miles, matching the industry average of 4.8 percent and tying for sixth place among 32 brands. This positions Tesla ahead of many established names, including Subaru (2.3 percent, roughly half of Tesla’s rate), Nissan (2.4 percent), Mazda, BMW, Mercedes-Benz, and Porsche.
Toyota leads with an impressive 17.8 percent likelihood, followed by Lexus (12.8 percent), Honda, and Acura. Yet Tesla’s result stands out for a relatively young EV brand. Experts attribute this to the inherent simplicity of electric powertrains: fewer moving parts mean no oil changes, timing belts, or complex engine components that typically fail in internal combustion vehicles.
Fewer things to maintain means fewer things to break, and ultimately, fewer things to go wrong.
A Tesla is twice as likely to reach 250,000 miles as a Subaru⁰⁰“No engine, no oil changes, no timing chains, no fuel injectors, and far fewer moving parts overall”⁰⁰https://t.co/k8iJwbzrrp
— Tesla North America (@tesla_na) June 8, 2026
This design advantage helps Teslas defy unfounded skepticism about battery longevity and overall durability, two things that have plagued the company from outsider perspectives without much proof.
The iSeeCars reliability ratings further bolster Tesla’s case. The Tesla Model S earns a strong 7.9/10 reliability score, ranking No. 1 out of 35 most reliable electric cars. It boasts a predicted average lifespan of about 154,419 miles (around 16.9 years) and a 21.9 percent chance of hitting 200,000 miles.
Tesla, as an electric car brand, also scores 7.9/10 overall, securing the top spot among electric vehicle manufacturers in several luxury and segment categories.
Real-world examples reinforce the data. High-mileage Teslas, including Model S vehicles exceeding one million miles, demonstrate that EVs can endure when properly maintained. Owners report minimal mechanical issues beyond typical wear items like tires and brakes, which regenerative braking often extends.
Tesla Model 3 hits quarter million miles with original battery and motor
This performance challenges narratives around EV reliability, especially amid mixed reports from other sources like Consumer Reports or regional inspections. iSeeCars‘ massive dataset emphasizes long-term durability over short-term defect rates, painting Tesla as a leader in sustainable, high-mileage ownership.
For buyers prioritizing longevity and low maintenance, Tesla’s results signal strong value. While no brand is flawless, factors like driving habits, climate, and software updates matter—the numbers suggest Tesla belongs among the elite for those seeking vehicles built to last.
As EV adoption grows, this iSeeCars data underscores Tesla’s engineering edge in creating enduring, future-proof automobiles.
Tesla owners have long griped about the wireless phone charger in the Model Y and other vehicles. It often turns smartphones into miniature ovens rather than reliably topping them up.
Software engineer and Model Y owner Michał Gapiński tackled this issue head-on with a clever DIY upgrade, swapping the cooled wireless charger pad from the China-made Model YL in for the one that came standard in his vehicle.
There are several key differences between the U.S.-built Model Y’s wireless charging pad and the one that Tesla has been installing in the Model YL. The one installed in U.S.-built vehicles lacks active cooling and relies on basic heat dissipation, leading to rapid temperature buildup during charging. In contrast, the Model YL integrates a small fan for active cooling.
Will it fit? Fingers crossed, I want a first YL charger deployed in the regular juniper pic.twitter.com/wWDqSNFVkW
— Michał Gapiński (@mikegapinski) June 2, 2026
This design maintains lower temperatures even in warm ambient conditions, though it does not support faster Qi2 charging on iPhones. The connector matches exactly, making physical swaps feasible on compatible consoles, but coding is required to enable full functionality.
Owners in the U.S. have complained about the wireless charging pad, with many reporting that overheating is fairly common. Within 20 or 30 minutes of placing a phone on the wireless charging pad, many have reported overheating messages on their phones, which halt charging and essentially turn the pad into a fancy place to rest your phone.
Many owners have opted to simply plug their phones into a charging cord. Tesla has acknowledged the problem by releasing several solutions for owners, including a relatively new feature that allows you to simply turn off the charging and simply act as a holder for your phone while driving.
Gapiński said that he sourced the cooled pad affordably from China, and it cost under $200 for the part.
He removed the existing console charger, swapped in the new unit, confirming a perfect connector fit, and handled the trim differences. Since the parameter isn’t fully secured, he enabled it through custom coding outside official Toolbox.
Connector is identical, she fits, now time to code it. https://t.co/Y9idgDrpCq pic.twitter.com/uwwgq6blg7
— Michał Gapiński (@mikegapinski) June 2, 2026
The fan activates quietly, blending with AC and seat cooling. He reported the installation was effective and the wireless charging pad worked perfectly; it even kept the phone cool as it stayed at just 86 degrees Fahrenheit. Many times, the wireless charging pad will bring the phone’s temperature well above 100 degrees, sometimes even being relatively hot to the touch.
The retrofit worked, no issues. First Model Y with a cooled wireless charger! No QI2/faster charging on the iPhone but it does not boil the phone even when it is 30 degrees outside.
The fan kicks in, it is not audible especially with the air conditioning and seat cooling. The… https://t.co/JOyR8Tb1Yo pic.twitter.com/kJcYhQIlYq
— Michał Gapiński (@mikegapinski) June 2, 2026
This retrofit highlighted an elegant, owner-driven solution to a factory shortcoming. It is expected that Tesla will begin installing the cooled charging pads into new cars in the U.S. soon, and hopefully, it will offer some sort of retrofit service or kit to owners here who want to use the charging pad effectively.
For those who love to tinker, it’s an accessible upgrade, proving that innovation thrives beyond the production line.
SpaceX IPO set to provide massive $11.6B windfall for teacher pension plan
Tesla skeptics will hate what this new reliability study says
