Two overnight launches from SpaceX and China

Both SpaceX and China successfully completed launches since yesterday. First, SpaceX launched a new group of satellites for the National Reconnaissance Office, its Falcon 9 lifting off from Vandenberg Space Force Base in California. For security reasons, the number of satellites launched was not revealed.

The first stage completed its 9th flight, landing on a drone ship in the Pacific.

Next China launched another set of Qianfan (SpaceSail) internet satellites into orbit, its Long March 6A rocket lifting off from its Taiyuan spaceport in northeast China. Though China’s stage run press did not reveal the number of satellites launched, past Long March 6A launches of this constellation have placed 18 satellites into orbit. If so, there are now 155 Quinfan satellites in space, out of a planned constellation of as many as 10,000. The first phase of the constellation however only requires 648, which China hopes to reach before the end of the year.

The state-run press also did not reveal where the rocket’s lower stages (using very toxic hypergolic fuels) crashed inside China.

The leaders in the 2026 launch race:

56 SpaceX
25 China
8 Russia
6 Rocket Lab

For the third straight year SpaceX leads the entire world combined in total launches, 56 to 46.

SpaceX hopes to complete another launch later today, carrying a Dragon cargo capsule to ISS (on its sixth flight), but weather might force a scrub.

China launches Tianzhou freighter to Tiangong-3 station

China today (May 11th in China) successfully launched the tenth Tianzhou freighter to its Tiangong-3 space station, its Long March 7 rocket lifting off from its coastal Wenchang spaceport.

China hopes to keep this cargo freighter in orbit for a full year, as part of its effort to reduce the number of cargo missions per year while expanding the capabilities of its spacecraft and station.

The leaders in the 2026 launch race:

55 SpaceX
24 China
8 Russia
6 Rocket Lab

For the third straight year SpaceX leads the entire world combined in total launches, 55 to 45.

Louisiana state senator: Two unnamed aerospace companies are bidding for major land purchase

Pecan Island SpaceX facility?

In response to the story earlier this week that SpaceX might be acquiring a 200-plus square mile patch of land near Pecan Island on the southern coast of Louisiana, a state senator has now confirmed that two unnamed aerospace companies have been talking with landowners about a possible purchase.

State Sen. Bob Hensgens, R-Abbeville, said he knows of two companies — he did not reveal if it is Elon Musk-owned SpaceX or Jeff Bezos’ Blue Origin — that have reached out to landowners in coastal Vermilion and Cameron parishes about a possible acquisition. “I know both companies are trying to find property in southwest Louisiana,” Hensgens said. “I know from people in the parishes that the companies have made outreach in the area.”

If so, we might actually have a bidding war for this property. Note however that nothing has yet been confirmed, including the names of the companies involved. The article at the link however provides some background into the 136K acre plot owned by Exxon, and how it might now be for sale. It also reports that a number of legislators (not Hensgens) have signed non-disclosure agreements about the negotiations.

Paraguay becomes the 67th nation to sign Artemis Accords

Artemis program logo

Paraguay yesterday became the 67th nation to sign Artemis Accords, continued the flood of smaller third world nations that have signed up in the last few weeks following the completion of the Artemis-2 mission around the Moon.

The remarks of NASA administration Jared Isaacman in connection with this event I find most tantalizing:

“They join an ever-growing coalition of like-minded nations committed to the peaceful, transparent, and responsible exploration of space. Established by President Trump in his first term, the Artemis Accords provided the principles for how we explore the Moon, Mars, and beyond. Now, with his national space policy, we are putting the Artemis Accords into practice with our Moon Base. We are creating opportunities for all Artemis Accords signatories, including Paraguay, to join us on the lunar surface and advance our shared objectives in this next era of exploration.” [emphasis mine]

While that national space policy [pdf] accepts the Outer Space Treaty’s limitation on establishing American law on other worlds, including property rights, it also makes its first goal that of promoting private enterprise.
» Read more

Multiple Russian, Chinese, and American satellites in maneuvering dance in orbit

Three different articles in the aerospace media today document multiple maneuvers by multiple military satellites from Russia, China, and America, either doing proximity operations near each other or moving close to another country’s satellites to spy on them.

This article in space.com describes the rendezvous operations of Russia’s Cosmos 2581, 2582, and 2583.

The satellites, known as COSMOS 2581 and COSMOS 2583, got within just 10 feet (3 meters) or so of each other on April 28, according to COMSPOC, a Pennsylvania-based space situational awareness software company. “This wasn’t a coincidental pass — COSMOS 2583 performed several fine maneuvers to maintain this tight configuration,” COMSPOC wrote in a May 1 post on X, which featured an animation of the rendezvous.

The two satellites and a third one, COSMOS 2582, launched to low Earth orbit in February 2025 atop a Soyuz rocket. According to COMSPOC, all three of them were involved in the recent rendezvous and proximity operations (RPO), as was “Object F,” a subsatellite previously deployed by COSMOS 2583.

Then russianspaceweb.com had two different articles describing different similar operations. First, a set of satellites launched in February 2026 appeared to be testing operations in very low orbit, illegally transmitting data using frequencies that the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) allocates for amateur radio operations.

Finally, the website reported a complex dance between Russian, American, and Chinese satellites in geosynchronous orbit.

Almost immediately after entering the geostationary orbit, Kosmos-2589 was “approached” by a presumed American inspector satellite, officially known as USA-325. On April 19, 2026, the US satellite, itself drifting eastward relative to the geostationary position and the Earth’s surface, seemingly overshot Kosmos-2589, but once the Russian satellite stabilized at 98 East longitude, USA-325 stopped and returned. By around April 28, 2026, … one approach under favorable lighting conditions for the “inspector” was within 13 kilometers from Kosmos-2589, according to a team of observers from Exton, PA, cited by COMSPOC.

In turn … Kosmos-2589 essentially occupied a position registered by China under designation CHNSAT-98E, with three Chinese commercial and military satellites deployed in relative vicinity of that location.

… Moreover, in April 2026, China’s presumed inspector satellite — TJS-10 — pre-positioned itself at 92.4 degrees East longitude after an easterly drift, which would put it on a rendezvous course with Kosmos-2589 at 98.0 East longitude. Instead, the Chinese satellite stopped its drift with a maneuver on May 1, 2026, which “fixed” it in a geostationary orbit at 92.4 degrees East longitude, in the vicinity of the US AEHF military satellite, which carries high-security communications of the US military and its allies.

With this last story, we have this almost absurd situation: The U.S. satellites are spying on Russian satellites, which are spying on Chinese satellites, which are spying on American satellites.

All this maneuvering however indicates once again that the ability of commercial satellites to rendezvous with other objects — either to de-orbit space junk or repair damaged satellites — is only going to get better. The military might control these capabilities now, under a veil of secrecy, but such capabilities always leak out into the private sector shortly thereafter.

Russia arrests Angara contractor for fraud

Fraud is a given when it comes to government operations, whether in the U.S. or Russia. A contractor doing work on the production facilities for Russia’s new Angara rocket has now been arrested for stealing more than $7 million.

In May 2026, Gazeta.ru, citing regional courts, reported an arrest of Dmitry Zolotarev, the Director General at OOO RST Genpodryad, which was involved in renovations and upgrades of facilities for serial production of Angara rockets at PO Polyot under a contract with GKNPTs Khrunichev.

Zolotarev and his accomplices were accused of stealing 545 million rubles (approximately $7.3 million) during a period from 2022 to 2025, by submitting the Federal treasury agency in Moscow forged documents with an inflated purchase price of overhead cranes and pocketing the difference. According to Gazeta.ru, Zolotarev was suspected of other similar schemes and faced 10 years in prison if convicted.

Government routinely does a bad job in monitoring its spending, which thus creates an easy temptation for others to put their hands in the cookie jar and take what’s not theirs. We can see this same thing occurring now in the U.S. with many so-called “safety net” programs. Since Russia’s entire aerospace industry is government controlled, this kind of corruption therefore happens frequently within it.

Lockheed Martin fights request to ease 2018 restrictions on Northrop Grumman’s solid rocket business

A legal fight between Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman has broken out over Northrop Grumman’s recent request to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to ease a 2018 consent order that restricts Northrop Grumman’s ability to market its solid rocket motors (SRM).

On April 2, Northrop petitioned the Federal Trade Commission to drop a 2018 consent order helmed when Northrop acquired solid rocket motor maker Orbital ATK. The consent agreement requires Northrop to supply SRMs to its competitors in the missile market on a non-discriminatory basis and to firewall its SRM business away from its other operations.

At the time, the FTC believed the measure was necessary due to Northrop’s status as a prime contractor and Orbital ATK’s position as one of only two American makers of solid rocket motors.

Northrop is not a major manufacturer in the American missile space, which is dominated by Raytheon and Lockheed. However, if the order is dropped, Northrop will be able to vertically integrate its solid rocket motor business with any munitions the company designs in the future — including potentially prioritizing SRM supplies for Northrop over competitors, Lockheed stated in a response to the petition.

This consent order has prevented Northrop from marketing its solid-fueled rockets openly. Instead, it appears it forces the company to sell to its competitors, such as Lockheed, who then garners the big profits in marketing them. That order I think has also limited Northrop’s ability to use its boosters for other purposes, such as launching satellites.

Overall it appears this consent order has been very counter-productive, in hindering competition in the American solid-fueled rocket industry. At present there is a shortage of production capacity in the U.S., so much so that the Italian rocket company has moved in to market its own solid-fueled rockets here. In fact, it is selling its rockets to Lockheed and Raytheon, which suggests Northrop is entirely justified in asking to be released from this order.

The UK’s Sutherland spaceport now appears dead

Proposed or active spaceports in North Europe
Proposed or active spaceports in North Europe

In a news report yesterday about the failure of the United Kingdom’s rocket startup Orbex in February 2026, the following details about the Sutherland spaceport in Scotland suggests that spaceport is now defunct, with little chance of being revived.

Administrators say that one of Orbex’s key remaining assets is the Sutherland Spaceport site near Melness – although the only construction work undertaken at the site is some 600m of access road. The company responsible for it, Sutherland Spaceport Ltd (SSL), remains financially stable, according to administrators. This means the site could still be sold or potentially restarted, even though no launch activity is currently taking place.

The spaceport sits on land leased from local crofters under a long-term arrangement managed through Highlands and Islands Enterprise. SSL holds a 50-year sublease, with an option to extend for 25 years, and a break clause in 2027.

Orbex had originally intended to launch from Sutherland — close to the rocket factory it had built — but local opposition by billionaire Anders Holch Povlsen (who is a major owner in the competing Saxavord spaceport on the Shetland Islands) as well as endless bureaucratic delays from the UK’s Civil Aviation Authority made that impossible. The company attempted to switch its launches to Saxavord, but the cost and new licensing requirements were too much.

No other launch company has expressed any interest in using Sutherland, and it appears none will be forthcoming in the near future. The red tape in the UK, combined with that powerful local opposition, has made Sutherland a pariah to the smallsat rocket companies looking for launch sites.

Though the spaceport might say it is “financially stable”, without any customers I guarantee it is going to disappear at some point.

Malta signs Artemis Accords

On the same day (May 4th) Ireland officially signed the Artemis Accords (as announced on May 1st), Malta also signed the accords, becoming the 66th nation to join this American space alliance.

The Republic of Malta became the 65th signatory to the Artemis Accords on Monday during a ceremony in the town of Kalkara with NASA and U.S. Department of State officials present. … Malta’s Minister for Education, Youth, Sports, Research and Innovation Clifton Grima signed the Artemis Accords on behalf of the country. … U.S. Ambassador to Malta Somers W. Farkas and NASA Europe Representative Gregory Mann witnessed the signing together with Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Tourism Ian Borg.

As I predicted on April 30th, the success of the Artemis-2 mission has caused a lot of third world smaller nations to quickly jump on the bandwagon, with Latvia, Jordan, Morocco, Ireland, and now Malta all signing in just the past week.

The full list of nations in this American space alliance is as follows:

Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, India, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Malta, Mexico, Morocco, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Panama, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Thailand, the Philippines, the United Kingdom, the United Arab Emirates, the Ukraine, the United States and Uruguay.

Expect more nations to sign on in the coming weeks.

China imposes extensive regulations on its pseudo-commercial space industry

China's communists to its citizens
China’s communists to its citizens “Nice business you got here.
Shame if something happened to it.”

As I predicted when China announced in the fall 2025 that it was creating a special agency to supervise the pseudo-companies in its faux commercial space industry, the Chinese government last week announced the release of what it calls its “Commercial spaceflight standards system,” covering all aspects of the operations its pseudo-private companies.

The standards cover six different areas, but the first best expresses the government’s overall goal:

‘Industry Governance Standards’ focuses on the sector’s characteristics of rapid development, agile response, and short delivery times, alongside space safety concerns such as debris mitigation and protection. With subcategories including market access, safety supervision, space environment governance, certification, energy conservation, and occupational health, it is intended to establish hard regulatory constraints as the compliance foundation for orderly commercial space development. [emphasis mine]

The screen capture from a Monty Python skit to the right says it all. The communists running China apparently did not like the chaotic free nature of this pseudo-industry, with the different companies coming up with many wild and innovative ideas, some of which were bound to fail. The communists also saw that some of these pseudo-companies were also making a lot of money that the communists weren’t getting.

And so, the government formed this agency, and it called the companies together to lay down the law.
» Read more

No Starliner mission to ISS this year

Though in February 2026 NASA officials suggested there might be a Starliner cargo mission to ISS sometime in April 2026, the new schedule released today for ISS manned and cargo missions for the rest of this year shows no Starliner missions at all.

The press release hinted an extra Starliner mission could be added, but don’t but too much faith in this:

Launch opportunities for NASA’s uncrewed Boeing Starliner-1 cargo mission remain under review as teams continue working through technical issues discovered during the Crew Flight Test in 2024, as well as final actions from the Program Investigation Team report. The agency is assessing operational readiness and space station traffic to determine the earliest feasible launch window.

What I think is happening in NASA is that the agency under Isaacman wants a better assurance from Boeing that the problems with Starliner have been fixed, and Boeing is having trouble satisfying them. If so, it seems he is doing what I suggested in February, demand from Boeing the highest quality work or don’t buy anything from it at all. If so kudos to Isaacman.

It is also possible Isaacman doesn’t want to spend extra money paying Boeing for this extra cargo mission to prove out Starliner’s systems. Boeing’s contract for Starliner is fixed price, and the capsule’s multiple problems has now cost the company more than a billion dollars. It is unlikely it will have make a profit on it, which is why it wants NASA to pay for that cargo flight.

Either way, the first operational manned mission using Starliner continues to recede into the future, to the point where ISS might be gone before the capsule is finally okayed for manned flights.

Next Artemis mission will be later than promised

Artemis logo

It appears that NASA has already recognized that the next Artemis mission, dubbed Artemis-3 and changed from a lunar landing to an Earth orbit test flight, will not happen on the schedule as first proposed by NASA administrator Jared Isaacman.

During the hearing on Monday, Congressman Hal Rogers (R-Ky.), chairman emeritus of the committee, asked Isaacman about his confidence that Artemis 3 would remain on schedule, given the amount of money allocated for the mission’s landers.

“I’ve received responses from both vendors [SpaceX and Blue Origin],” Isaacman said, “to meet our needs for a late 2027 rendezvous, docking and test [of] the interoperability of both landers in advance of a landing attempt in 2028.”

That’s a shift from Isaacman’s statements during his Feb. 27 Artemis strategy presentation, during which he said, “Artemis 3 will have its opportunity, if we can, by mid-2027, which sets us up for an early ’28 and a late ’28 opportunity [for Artemis 4 and 5].” [emphasis mine]

In other words, Artemis-3 has already shifted from mid-’27 to late-’27. Though Isaacman is pushing hard to speed up the launch cadence of the entire Artemis program, reality is once again proving stronger. We should fully expect Artemis-3 to shift into 2028, partly because the lunar landers — especially Blue Origin’s Blue Moon — might not be ready but mostly because SLS is simply too cumbersome a rocket to stack quickly. Isaacman wants to speed up its launch cadence to once a year. The best we should expect is 18 months to two years.

As for getting two manned lunar landings in 2028, Isaacman might want it but the odds are slim to none. If Artemis-3 flies in late ’27 it will be almost impossible to get SLS ready for a landing mission before the end of ’28.

In the end, these delays will illustrate the need to replace SLS with private commercial launchers.

House Appropriations committee approves NASA budget, with some cuts proposed by Trump

In what is no surprise if one watched last week’s House hearing about the NASA budget, the House Appropriations committee yesterday approved a NASA budget for fiscal year 2027, giving the agency the same funding it had in 2026, just over $24 billion, rejecting Trump’s proposed major reduction in the budget of over $5 billion.

The vote was along party lines, with the Republicans approving and the Democrats opposing. As expected, while the overall budget was maintained, the Republicans went along with the sense of Trump’s cuts — and the desires of NASA administrator Jared Isaacman — by shifting money from science to exploration within the budget.

The subcommittee bill provides $8.926 billion for human exploration, an increase of about $400 million above the request, and the request itself favors exploration. … The subcommittee’s bill raises the FY2027 level for [NASA science] to $6 billion, but that’s still a $1.3 billion reduction from current spending as Ranking Member Grace Meng (D-New York) pointed out.

The bill also agreed with Trump’s proposal to eliminate NASA’s STEM education office, something Isaacman had repeatedly testified was redundant and a waste of money.

In other words, the committee is giving Isaacman more flexibility with the money it is giving him, as I predicted.

This is only the first step in the budget process. The budget still has to be approved by the full House, the Senate, and the President. Expect changes.

Russia completes 1st test, suborbital, of its new Soyuz-5 rocket

According to Russia’s state-run press, it successfully completed the first suborbital test flight of its new Soyuz-5 rocket, the rocket lifting off from Baikonur in Kazahkstan on April 28, 2026 carrying a dummy payload.

A special launch was conducted today as Soyuz-5, a new Russian carrier rocket with the world’s most powerful liquid-fuel engine, blasted off. <...> Operating the rocket will make it possible to substantially reduce the unit cost of the payload capacity. This will have a positive impact on the economics of space launches,” the Russian state-owned space corporation quoted its CEO Dmitry Bakanov as saying.

The rocket will eventually be able to place about 17 tons in low Earth orbit, making it more powerful than the Soyuz-2 — now used to launch capsules and satellites — but less powerful than Russia’s Proton rocket, used to launch station modules and other more demanding missions.

Soyuz-5 however is not reusable, so it will remain more expensive to use that the new rockets being developed everywhere else outside Russia. Like all of Russia’s rockets, stages will continue to fall inside Russia with each launch. In this case, the first stage and fairings crashed somewhere in Russia, while the second stage splashed down in the Pacific.

Ireland to sign Artemis Accords

According to a NASA press release late yesterday, Ireland will sign the Artemis Accords on May 4, 2026, becoming the 65th nation to join this American space alliance.

NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman will host Ambassador of Ireland to the United States of America Geraldine Byrne Nason; Minister for Enterprise, Tourism and Employment Peter Burke, T.D., of Ireland; and U.S. Department of State officials for the ceremony.

As I predicted yestesday when Morocco signed the accords, the success of the Artemis-2 mission around the Moon has prompted a number of smaller third world countries to finally sign the accords, and thus should expect more signings to follow. Ireland illustrates this. There will be more soon.

The full list of nations in this American space alliance is as follows:

Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, India, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Mexico, Morocco, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Panama, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Thailand, the Philippines, the United Kingdom, the United Arab Emirates, the Ukraine, the United States and Uruguay.

The present state of India’s space program

India's Bharatiya Antariksh Station as outlined in 2024
India’s Bharatiya Antariksh Station as outlined in 2024.
Click for original image.

India’s space agency ISRO yesterday released its annual report [pdf], outlining its accomplishments over during 2025.

Like all such reports, it is filled with glowing superlatives. It provides little concrete information about the agency’s more serious issues, such as what it is doing to fix the upper stage of its PSLV rocket, which has failed on the last two consecutive launches. All the annual report says on this subject is the following:

Based on the recommendations of the National Level Committee comprising of eminent experts from academia & industry, the third stage of PSLV i.e., HPS3 motor with modified design was realised and two static tests were successfully completed on October 06, 2025 and November 19, 2025 as in flight, from SDSC, SHAR. The overall performance of the motor and subsystems were as expected and closer to nominal performance.

The problem is that these fixes and tests did not work. The second failure of the upper stage occurred in January 2026, less than two months later. The annual report should have noted this fact, but did not.

As for India’s planetary program, digging out the present schedule from the report is difficult. Based on this review of the annual report, the dates are as follows:

  • Chandrayaan 4 lunar sample return mission: October 2027.
  • Venus Orbiter: March 2028.
  • Chandrayaan 5 /LUPEX lunar lander: September 2028.
  • Mars Lander: No target launch date as yet.

Expect these dates to be delayed.

The report also gives a detailed description on India’s Gaganyaan manned program, but little information about the planned unmanned tests that were planned for this year, leading to a manned orbital mission next year. At the moment the schedule appears to be experiencing delays, caused mostly by the PSLV launch failures. It appears ISRO wants this issue resolved before it launches that first unmanned Gaganyaan test flight.

If you want to get an overview of India’s government space program, this annual report is a good place to start. It will at least provide a baseline on which you can build a deeper knowledge.

Who really was Jay Gould?

The life and legend of Jay Gould

To get to the point, right at the start, Jay Gould was not a “Robber Baron”, nor was he the worst “Robber Baron,” as many journalists of his time as well as many historians in the next century liked to slander him, implying he was unethical, cruel, and routinely used under-handed tactics to destroy others while making himself wealthy. In fact, he was no more a robber baron then the entire class of hard-nosed businessmen who in the 1800s became America’s first generation of today’s billionaires, using the free enterprise system to gather wealth to themselves while building vast industries that employed millions and made the lives of everyone better and more prosperous.

I have just finished reading Maury Klein’s 1997 fine biography of Jay Gould, the Life and Legend of Jay Gould, and was not surprised to learn that Gould was never the evil personification of worst sort of capitalist, as routinely portrayed by our leftist academia for the past century. Instead, I discovered he was no different then all the other leading businessmen of his time, hard-nosed and ruthless when it came to cutting deals, but strongly committed to making the businesses he ran profitable and successful, providing the public a useful product they would be eager to use.

You see, in a free capitalist society, you can’t succeed unless you are willing to be ruthless at times. This doesn’t necessarily mean you routinely use violence, or break the law, or go out of your way to hurt others, but it does mean you defend yourself from attack, and retaliate quickly using legal means when under attack. These rules apply today as they did in Gould’s time. Nothing has changed.

Gould was no different than Cornelius Vanderbilt (whose life I reviewed here). Nor does he differ from John D. Rockefeller, or Elon Musk, or Jeff Bezos, or any one of the thousands and thousands of American businessmen, who from the founding of this country used its free but legal framework to build a nation while enriching themselves.

Gould’s most famous area of success involved his ownership of many railroads, both in the American west as well as the first elevated subways in New York City. He also gained full control over Western Union, and for more than a decade ran a system that provided the entire country and even the world its first instantaneous method of communications. To gain control over these venues involved many battles, some of which required tactics that were harsh, even a bit under-handed, and clever. Sometimes it required payoffs to politicians, or tricky stock deals that once completed left many others sinking in the wake.

A typical anti-Gould newspaper cartoon from 1882
A typical anti-Gould newspaper cartoon from 1882

Gould’s tactics however were never much different than those of others of his ilk. And like those others, his overall good management of his companies he controlled, as well as the good treatment of the people who worked under him, garnered strong loyalty and support across these industries. Gould wanted control, but always when he had it he used it to make his product better and more useful.

When he died, it was the people who knew him who had good things to say about him, and it was the journalists who did not who continued to spread the slanders, because it made good copy and sold newspapers. And sadly, for the decades that followed, historians used those news reports — mostly wrong — as their primary sources of information, and thus the legend of an evil Gould was created.

Klein’s biography is a worthy effort to counter this bad history. More Americans should read it, if only to realize their past history was far more admirable than what they have been taught for the past few generations.

Gould’s tactics — and his success — were things he learned very earlier on in life, when he went out on his own.
» Read more

Propaganda vs reporting in describing the battle over NASA’s budget

Jared Isaacman before the Senate
Jared Isaacman before the Senate

NASA administrator Jared Isaacman yesterday appeared before a subcommittee of the Senate Appropriations committee, and as happened last week when Isaacman appeared before a House committee, the reality of what happened at the hearing differed greatly from what most new sources reported.

The main topic of both hearings were the proposed $5.6 billion cut in NASA’s budget, proposed by President Trump. Isaacman has made it clear he does not oppose this cut, stating repeatedly in public that he has plenty of money to do what he wants, that there is much waste and needless spending at NASA that needs reform, and by trimming that out he will find the cash he needs.

As I noted in reporting about that House hearing, I was struck by the lack of hard opposition to those cuts. The Republicans generally made little of the issue, though they seemed generally opposed to the cuts. And though the Democrats as expected blasted the cuts, they did so in a generally subdued manner, only showing passion in noting the elimination to NASA STEM education office. Isaacman’s willingness to push back hard against more spending took the wind out of their demands for more money, and so they muted their protests.

Unfortunately, if you relied on our propaganda press for an honest report of this House hearing, you would have been misinformed. As shown below, that propaganda press distorted this reality to back big government spending without question.

The Senate hearing yesterday followed the exact same pattern. The questioning was generally friendly, and Isaacman aggressively pushed back at the demands for more spending by Democrats. This made their push for more spending more difficult, because Isaacman knows what he is talking about, supports an ambitious space program at NASA, and if he says he doesn’t need the extra money, they look foolish throwing it at him.

Yet, the propaganda press once again tried to spin the hearing to promote more spending. Though this hearing got less coverage, the following two stories were typical:

Only one news source (outside of my reporting here), R&D World, reporting this hearing accurately: Senate largely hearing splits on party lines over proposed $5.6 billion NASA cut

Now, I am not naive. I fully expect Congress to restore most of the proposed cuts to NASA’s budget. At the same time, both hearings suggest that Congress will also afford Isaacman more leeway on how he uses the money. He will be able to cut or reshape major projects. He will be able to shut down some offices that he considers wasteful or redundant. And above all, he will be given the freedom to reform NASA in ways no Congress has allowed in decades.

Canada cancels $72 million contract to build constellation to track wildfires

In what appears to be an unexpected decision, the Canadian government this past week suddenly terminated a $72 million contract with the company Spire Global Canada to build a constellation of satellites designed to locate and track wildfires.

According to a Form 8-K filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Spire Global received a written notice on April 23, 2026, from the Minister of Public Works and Government Services (PWGS) terminating the agreement “for convenience,” effective immediately. The Phase B and C contract would have had an aggregate value of $71.8 million, including harmonized sales tax, if all contractual milestones had been achieved. The value of the overall WildFireSat satellite constellation including Phase D for manufacturing, system assembly, and integration is $106 million.
WildFireSat mission setback

This represents a serious setback for the Canadian Space Agency (CSA) and other government departments who are participating in the mission. Only a month ago the project was being touted as high return-on-investment climate mission in the annual Canadian Space Agency 2026–27 Departmental Plan.

The plan had called for a constellation of nine smallsats, with one back-up ready for launch on the ground.

No reason has been given for the cancellation. The Canadian Space Agency merely stated that “The Government of Canada will soon be engaging with industry and begin working closely with stakeholders on how best to advance the continued development of this important mission.” Spire Global meanwhile has until May 7th to apply for settlement costs.

Rocket Factory Augsburg submits license application for a Saxavord launch window opening on July 1, 2026

Proposed or active spaceports in North Europe
Proposed or active spaceports in North Europe

The German rocket startup Rocket Factory Augsburg has now submitted a new marine license application to allow it to attempt the first launch of its RFA-1 rocket from the Saxavord spaceport on the Shetland Islands in Scotland, with a launch window opening on July 1, 2026.

Rocket Factory had hoped to do this launch in 2024, but lost the first stage mere weeks before launch when it exploded during a final static fire test on the launchpad. Since then the company has undergone a management shake-up and made major changes to operations and its rocket.

To do this launch, however, it needs a new launch license, and that is a major problem. The company’s announcement is filled with numerous vague qualifiers, as it knows getting the bureaucracies in the United Kingdom to move quickly in this matter is nigh on impossible.

This is a legally required step for planning, and a good sign of how far we’ve come – but it’s not a launch date just yet. We applied for this window because we’re working hard to be ready – and we’re getting closer every day.

So: the application means we’re entering a new phase of preparation. Still, as with any first-ever launch, there are uncertainties, and the schedule may evolve. Further specific details around launch timing will be released through the appropriate channels closer to the time. We’ll keep you posted!

In other words, the company will not be surprised if it doesn’t get its license in time for July, and is prepared for delays.

Another German rocket startup, Isar Aerospace, has been trying to launch its Spectrum rocket from Norway’s Andoya spaceport since January, with the launch scrubbed several times due to technical issues. Right now the launch its tentatively scheduled for May, which means the race to achieve the first orbital launch from Europe is tightening considerably.

If I had to place a bet, my money would be on Isar, not Rocket Factory, and the reason would be because I truly doubt the British bureaucracy will issue a license on time. Its track record has been abysmal, sometimes taking years to give an okay. In this case it might not take that long, since Saxavord has gotten all its own permits already (after years of waiting) but no one should be confident it will act with speed. And it is clear that the people at Rocket Factory are not.

California Coastal Commission settles SpaceX lawsuit by apologizing and conceding all points

Wants to be a dictator
Wanted to be a dictator; ended up being
a patsy.

SpaceX yesterday settled its lawsuit [pdf] with the California Coastal Commission when the commission agreed to apologize to the company and agree it has no authority to regulate any SpaceX launches at Vandenberg Space Force Base.

The Commission agrees that it may not consider irrelevant factors in performing its function and specifically agrees that it will not take into account the perceived political beliefs, political speech, or labor practices of SpaceX or its officers in considering any regulatory action concerning SpaceX. The Commission acknowledges that Commissioners made statements, including during their October 10, 2024, hearing on the Base’s Falcon 9 launch program, that showed political bias against SpaceX and its CEO and were improper. The Commission apologizes for those statements, as set forth in the signed letter attached as Exhibit C.

The commission also agreed that it has no authority to regulate SpaceX’s launch rate at its launchpads at Vandenberg, and will never again attempt to interfere with these operations.

The SpaceX lawsuit stemmed from the comments made by the commissioners at a meeting in October 2024 when then voted against the military’s plan to allow SpaceX to increase its launch rate at Vandenberg spaceport to up to 50 launches per year. In those comments, the commissioners made it clear that the main reason they were voting against the motion was because they were offended by Elon Musk and his political positions, not because the company was doing anything wrong.

While the settlement does not restrict the commission’s right to regulate off-base actions, or other aspects under its statutory authority, this settlement is a complete victory for SpaceX. The commission members were probably made aware that if they didn’t back down completely, they would be personally liable for a great deal of damages. As a result of this settlement, they are absolved of all liabilities.

FAA to begin taxing launches by payload weight

FAA logo

As per the provisions in last year’s reconciliation budget bill (dubbed for propaganda reasons by Trump the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act”), the FAA was authorized to begin charging fees (another word for taxes) on the mass of each launch payload. The agency last week announced it is now doing so.

More information here.

For 2026, that fee is 25 cents per pound of payload, capped at $30,000 per launch or reentry. The fees would fund work on improving integration of launches and reentries into the national airspace system directed by an FAA reauthorization act in 2024.

Though the amount per launch is small compared to the cost of the launch itself, this new tax is expected to provide ample funds to allow the FAA to expand its licensing operations to meet the growing launch industry. The real challenge will be whether the bureaucracy can stay focused on its main task of serving the public, or use the money to build a new bureaucratic empire aimed at garnering power over the private sector. History suggests we should be pessimistic, and expect the latter.

In the meantime, rocket companies are simply going to apply this new tax to the makers of their payloads, who in turn will have their customers pay the cost.

Starlink returns to Papua New Guinea after court ruling

SpaceX’s Starlink internet service will once again be available in Papua New Guinea after its court this week overturned a ban that had been imposed by a government bureaucracy.

In early 2024, the [Ombudsman] Commission blocked licensing efforts for Starlink, arguing that existing regulations may not be adequate to manage potential risks to public interest and safety.

But in her National Court ruling last week, Judge Susan Purdon-Sully strongly criticised the Ombudsman Commission for its move to halt Starlink’s license process. Finding no breach of PNG’s leadership code, nor evidence of corruption, the judge said the Ombudsman’s concerns were more administrative, meaning its directive to NICTA had been “an unconstitutional exercise of power”.

Meanwhile, the prime minister again urged Starlink to work collaboratively with state-owned Telikom PNG to “ensure a coordinated rollout that complements national infrastructure priorities”.

The article describes in detail several recent natural disasters where the lack of Starlink was a critical component in rescue and repair operations. The country also has large rural areas where Starlink is the only method for reaching the rest of the world quickly. There was thus apparently great political pressure to end this ban.

Avio makes more from its Vega-C rocket now that Arianespace is out of the picture

According to a report today at Europeanspaceflight.com, the European Space Agency (ESA) paid Arianespace €51.65 million ($60.6 million) for a December 2024 launch using the Vega-C rocket that the Italian company Avio produces.

That flight was one of the last ones managed by Arianespace. In November 2025 ESA completed the transfer of ownership back to Avio, so that the company now manages and sells its own rocket, rather than have a middle-man government agency run things and take a cut.

Since then Avio has won three separate launch contracts, one from Taiwan for $81 million, another from Brazil for $35.6 million, and a third from Airbus for $84.4 million (see here).

Based on these numbers, it appears that Avio is doing much better selling this rocket directly to the market than having Arianespace and ESA run things for it. It is not only generally getting slightly more revenue per launch (about $67 million average compared to $60.6 million under Arianespace), but it is keeping all the profits, rather than having the Arianespace government bureaucracy take a percentage.

These numbers however won’t hold in the coming years. In the U.S. in the next year at least two reusable rockets — Rocket Lab’s Neutron and Stoke Space’s Nova — are coming on line, and will drive these launch prices down. Furthermore, new smallsat rockets being developed in Germany (two), Spain, India (two), South Korea, and Australia should do the same.

At the moment however Avio is benefiting from the present state of the market, though even that advantage is threatened because it has had to delay the next Vega-C launch due to a technical issue.

Regardless, these numbers give us a strong sense of the present competitive launch costs in today’s market, averaging about $60 million per launch. Before SpaceX came along, that price generally exceeded more than $100 million, and often as high as $200 to $500 million. No more. SpaceX has forced competition on the industry, and the result has been a notable drop in price, with more to come.

Trump fires the entire governing board of the National Science Foundation

In a move that should surprise no one at this point in Trump’s second term, yesterday President Trump informed all 24 members of the National Science Board, the committee that runs the National Science Foundation (NSF), that they have been fired.

“On behalf of President Donald J Trump, I am writing to inform you that your position as a member of the National Science Board is terminated, effective immediately,” reads a 24 April email from Mary Sprowls of the presidential personnel office to each NSB member. “Thank you for your service.”

The article at the link, from the journal Science, takes the typical one-sided propaganda press anti-Trump view, interviewing only those who oppose Trump and spending most of its time screaming “He’s destroying science!”

A wider view would ask this: Is there a reason that the president of the United States, elected by the American people, might have reasons to question the management of this board? At the moment the federal government is running a deficit that is back-breaking, and this board publicly criticized Trump’s effort to rein in spending when he proposed a 55% cut in NSF’s budget. If they are not going to cooperate with their boss, then maybe they should leave, and not let the door hit them as they head out.

The Science article also included this howler: “the mass firing is the latest indication that the White House is ignoring the board’s authority and dictating policies at NSF.” Um, who elected them? No one. In fact, they were appointed by the president himself, and he is the only one with the constitutional authority to decide these matters.

Expect court suits of course, with some lower level unelected judge somewhere attempting to take over running the executive branch by demanding these board members remain in power, defying the elected president of the U.S.

Indian rocket startup Skyroot now shipping its Vikram rocket to launch site

The Indian rocket startup Skyroot has now finished assembling its Vikram-1 rocket, and is about to ship it to its launch site at the Sriharikota spaceport on the east coast of India.

At Sriharikota, the rocket moves into final assembly and a round of system checks before a launch window is locked in the coming months. This is the last stretch before liftoff. Countdown operations, testing and integration now shift fully to the launch site.

One of the company’s founders said the most critical testing has been completed, with launch campaign activities set to begin at the spaceport.

The company is presently targeting a launch in June. If Vikram-1 reaches orbit successfully, Skyroot would become the first Indian private company to design, build, and launch its own rocket, and would be well positioned to win launch contracts from smallsat companies, competing directly with Rocket Lab and its Electron rocket.

This success would also help accelerate the Modi government’s effort to transition from a space industry controlled entirely by its government space agency ISRO to a private industry run by competing indepedent companies.

Why is Sierra Space’s Dream Chaser spacecraft not ready for flight?

In a press release posted last week Sierra Space proudly announced that its Tenacity Dream Chaser mini-shuttle has completed its pre-launch ground vibration tests at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida, but instead of moving the mini-shuttle to a local facility where it could be integrated with its rocket for launch, the company announced it was shipping it back “to Colorado for final modifications and mission-specific upgrades.”

Normally when a spacecraft, satellite, or any payload passes these last ground tests, it is ready for launch, and it immediately begins integration onto the rocket that will carry it into space. That Sierra Space is not doing this strongly suggests Tenacity did not pass with flying colors, and that some issues were identified that need correction.

Note too that this spacecraft had been delivered for these tests in early 2024, and had been expected to pass them then and be launched that year. Instead, months passed with no word, then its launch was postponed indefinitely, and then NASA canceled Sierra’s contract to provide cargo to ISS.

Now, two years later Tenacity is still not ready for launch. Though the company says the ground tests are now complete, I suspect otherwise. I suspect there is some fundamental issue with the spacecraft that they are hiding because to reveal it would be devastating to Sierra’s public reputation.

Until we know more however this is pure speculation on my part. What we do know however is that this mini-shuttle has not done what was promised, and increasingly appears to be a lemon that will never do it.

Two launches today, by China and Russia

Both China and Russia completed launches today. First China put a Pakistani Earth observation satellite into orbit, its Long March 6 rocket lifting off from Taiyuan spaceport in north China. China’s state-run press made no mention of where the rocket’s lower stages, using very toxic hypergolic fuels, crashed inside China.

Next Russia launched a Progress cargo capsule to ISS, its Soyuz-2 rocket lifting off from Baikonur in Kazakhstan. The freighter will dock with ISS in two days.

The leaders in the 2026 launch race:

49 SpaceX
23 China
8 Russia
6 Rocket Lab

For the third straight year SpaceX continues to lead the entire world combined in total launches, 49 to 42.

Space Force issues twelve companies Golden Dome contracts worth $3.2 billion

As part of the first phase of development of the proposed Golden Dome defensive system, the Space Force revealed this week that it has awarded twelve companies contracts worth $3.2 billion to develop the first prototype designs.

The service awarded other transaction authority (OTA) agreements — worth up to a combined $3.2 billion — to the vendors in late 2025 and early 2026, according to a Space Systems Command press release. Under the contracts, the companies will develop prototypes of a space-based architecture that can shoot down enemy missiles after they’re launched.

The companies that received OTAs are Anduril, Booz Allen Hamilton, General Dynamics Mission Systems, GITAI USA, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Quindar, Raytheon, Sci-Tec, SpaceX, True Anomaly and Turion Space Corp.

The twelve companies have very different capabilities, suggesting the Space Force is hoping to get a lot of different ideas and proposals that will not only give it options but could also provide it multiple methods for destroying in-coming missiles.

Soyuz launch site destroyed at French Guiana

As promised, the Soyuz-2 launch site at France’s French Guiana spaceport was destroyed in a controlled explosion yesterday.

I have embedded video of the explosion below.

The remaining infrastructure at the site—including the assembly and testing complex, railway lines, liquid oxygen storage facilities, and fueling systems—will be transferred to MaiaSpace, a French startup affiliated with Arianespace. The company plans to reuse up to 80% of the existing infrastructure for its own launch vehicle program.

MaiaSpace is not “affliated with Arianespace.” It is a wholly owned subsidiary of ArianeGroup, the company that makes the much larger rocket Ariane-6. The company hopes MaiaSpace’s smaller Maia rocket can capture some of the smallsat business presently owned by Rocket Lab and SpaceX.

The Russians had almost a dozen launches scheduled from this launchpad, worth more than a billion dollars in revenue, when Putin decided to invade the Ukraine in 2022. Russia immediately became a pariah to the rest of the work. That revenue instantly vanished and the companies found other launch providers.

Europe meanwhile gave control of French Guiana back to France, which owns it. France in turn has now been leasing out the unused launchpads there to new rocket startups. Though some pie-in-the-sky academics lobbied to preserve the Soyuz launchpad for “historical reasons”, the French had no desire to do so. Better to make money.
» Read more

1 2 3 334