\n<\/p>\n
Elon Musk aggressively elbowed his way into the space launch business over the past two decades, combining engineering genius and an entrepreneurial drive with a demand that the U.S. government stop favoring the big, slow-moving contractors that had long dominated the industry.<\/p>\n
Today, it is Mr. Musk who is dominant. His company, SpaceX, is the primary provider of launch services to NASA and to the Pentagon. His rockets carry far more commercial satellites into orbit than anyone else\u2019s, including those for his own Starlink communications network. He has set new standards for reaching space cheaply and reliably.<\/p>\n
But in one striking way, the former outsider has come to resemble the entrenched contractors he once fought to topple: He is increasingly using his vast power and influence to try to keep emerging rivals at bay, his competitors say, even as his success is prompting qualms within the government about such heavy reliance on a mercurial billionaire.<\/p>\n
The new generation of space entrepreneurs trying to emulate Mr. Musk is sufficiently concerned about what they see as his anticompetitive tactics that some of them are now willing to take him on publicly.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
Tim Ellis started Relativity Space after being inspired by Mr. Musk\u2019s pursuit of a rocket that could carry humans to Mars. Then he heard from other industry executives that individuals with ties to SpaceX were trying to block his efforts to raise money for his own Mars project.<\/p>\n
Jim Cantrell worked with Mr. Musk at the founding of SpaceX in 2002. When he started to build his own launch company, Phantom Space, two potential customers told his sales team they could not sign deals because SpaceX inserts provisions in its contracts to discourage customers from using rivals.<\/p>\n
Peter Beck, an aerospace engineer from New Zealand, met in 2019 with Mr. Musk to talk about Mr. Beck\u2019s own launch company, called Rocket Lab. Several months later, SpaceX moved to start carrying small payloads at a discounted price that Mr. Beck and other industry executives said was intended to undercut their chances of success.<\/p>\n
\u201cI don\u2019t think this is an accidental monopoly,\u201d Mr. Beck said in an interview about SpaceX and Mr. Musk. \u201cThese are business decisions that are being made.\u201d<\/p>\n
None of these executives said they had taken legal action against SpaceX. And no one in the industry disputes that Mr. Musk and SpaceX deserve enormous credit for making spaceflight more affordable and almost routine.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
But his tactics are generating a backlash within the industry. And they are adding to concerns in the government about relying so heavily for a critical technology on someone known as much for his divisive public statements, his increasingly outspoken political positions that are at odds with U.S. policy and his deep business ties to rivals like China as he is for his engineering prowess.<\/p>\n
Mr. Musk endorsed an antisemitic theory late last year on his social media platform X. He has nurtured relationships with right-wing leaders around the world. And he has publicly stated that Russia will not lose its war against Ukraine, endorsing an argument that the United States should not have provided Kyiv with additional military assistance.<\/p>\n
\u201cElon Musk\u2019s rhetoric and behavior undermines his credibility and reliability on a global scale,\u201d said Senator Jeanne Shaheen, Democrat of New Hampshire, who this spring questioned Pentagon officials about Mr. Musk. \u201cCommercial services, including SpaceX, that do business with the U.S. government need to be thoroughly vetted to ensure that the U.S. military can depend on them in times of crisis.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
Last month, a bipartisan group of 36 House lawmakers sent a letter to Frank Kendall, the Air Force secretary, urging him to make sure that the Air Force pushes for \u201cincreased competition among launch providers.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
Representative Dale Strong, Republican of Alabama, whose office helped draft the letter, said he was concerned that a dominant Pentagon launch provider might squeeze out upstart rivals. \u201cThese smaller companies, they\u2019re just trying to cut their teeth,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
SpaceX did not respond to requests for comment. But when interviewed at a recent industry conference, one of SpaceX\u2019s senior executives disputed any suggestion that the company was trying to force other new launch companies out of business.<\/p>\n
\u201cI don\u2019t buy that, not at all,\u201d Gary Henry, who works on national security contracts for SpaceX after earlier posts with Boeing and the Air Force, said in the interview. \u201cI can see if you are on that end of it, it might feel that way. But people in those companies who know us personally know that is not the case.\u201d<\/p>\n
In a presentation to SpaceX employees in Texas this year, Mr. Musk did not directly address claims of anticompetitive behavior from rivals in the launch industry. But he noted that SpaceX had carried cargo to orbit, or agreed to do so in the future, for competitors in related businesses including Amazon, Telestat, OneWeb and Apple-backed Globalstar, all of which are rivals of SpaceX\u2019s Starlink communications network.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe\u2019re actually on contract to launch Amazon\u2019s Kuiper constellation,\u201d Mr. Musk said, evoking a round of laughter from the gathered SpaceX employees. \u201cAnd we treat everyone fairly.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
SpaceX\u2019s defenders also point out that the launch business appears to be growing more competitive, not less.<\/p>\n
Jeff Bezos\u2019 Blue Origin is close to its first launch for its New Glenn rocket. Rocket Lab is building what it calls Neutron, and Relativity Space is working on its Terran R, among other new entrants. After years of delays, Boeing is soon expected to start launching NASA astronauts into space on its new Starliner spacecraft.<\/p>\n
For now, though, the ability of the United States to reach orbit, particularly for its most vital classified military and spy satellites, remains largely dependent on Mr. Musk and his Falcon 9 rocket.<\/p>\n
\u201cHeaven forbid we have a mishap with a Falcon 9 launch,\u201d said Col. Richard Kniseley, who helps run Space Force\u2019s Commercial Space Office. \u201cThat means it is grounded, right? And that means we could be without launch. So that\u2019s where my concern is.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n