Prediction: SpaceX Will Not Cancel the Falcon 9 in 2028

16 years after its first flight, the Falcon 9 reusable rocket, workhorse of Space Exploration Technologies' (NASDAQ: SPCX) space fleet, is getting ready to retire -- or so says Space.com.

With nearly 700 launches (and more than 650 landings) under its belt, the Falcon 9 is the world's second-most-flown rocket ever (after Russia's Soyuz), and the rocket that flies most frequently today. Its payload to orbit (22.8 metric tons) and low launch cost ($74 million) make it arguably one of the most economical means of getting to orbit, too, with a price per kilogram to low earth orbit of only $3,245.

But despite its pedigree, and despite its economics, Space.com calls Falcon's retirement "inevitable" now that Elon Musk has vowed to shift his focus to SpaceX's newer, bigger, better, and cheaper rocket, Starship.

Image source: SpaceX.

@CJHandmer @SciGuySpace @SpaceX Once Starship is flying reliably several times per week, it makes sense to shift super scarce SpaceX engineering and production resources to Starship to get launch rate to several times per day, which means winding down Falcon

-- Elon Musk (@elonmusk) August 22, 2026

"Beginning in 2028," warns Space.com, "SpaceX may discontinue all but a few Falcon 9 missions" for NASA -- mostly resupply and astronaut transfer missions to the International Space Station -- and switch commercial operations to Starship. Worse news for other space companies: Most of those flights will carry SpaceX's own cargo to orbit as it continues to build out its Starlink internet constellation and seeks to begin deploying artificial intelligence (AI) data centers to low earth orbit.

Considering that Starship launches may cost as little as $10 million each, a fraction of a Falcon 9 launch, that makes good economic sense for SpaceX.

For everyone else, though, it could be a disaster.

The trouble with space launch

In a column last week for tech website Ars Technica, Eric Berger argued that when Falcon 9 withdraws from the commercial market, it will leave a yawning gap in launch supply behind it. "Between now and 2030, there will be a shortfall of about 150 launches compared to demand from satellite operators and civil space agencies," warns Berger. Add demand for national security launches servicing the U.S. Space Force, the National Reconnaissance Office, and other security forces, and the rocket gap widens.

And things will get worse before they get better. While multiple small new space companies are trying to build rockets comparable to SpaceX's Falcon, the companies that already possess such rockets -- including United Launch Alliance, Blue Origin, and Europe's Arianespace -- have largely found their fleets grounded by a variety of technical glitches. For most space customers who need a ride to space, it's currently SpaceX or bust.

Now, in space, problems are to be expected, but it's reasonable to expect that they will eventually be solved. ULA's Vulcan, Blue Origin's New Glenn, and Ariane's Ariane 6 should all eventually return to flight. None of them are likely to fly anywhere near as frequently as SpaceX's reusable Falcon 9, however. With Falcon leaving the lineup in 2028, Ars Technica's Berger thinks that year will be particularly supply-constrained, and some deficit in space launch capability may last until "late in the 2030s."

What will SpaceX do?

Or will it?

Once upon a time, Elon Musk declared: "Imagine you had $6 million in cash on a pallet flying through the air that's just going to smash into the ocean. Would you try to recover that? Yes, you would." And so he built giant fishnets, loaded them on boats, and tried to figure out a way to catch his rocket fairings as they fell back to earth so he could reuse them.

Now consider: Ars Technica's Berger is suggesting there's an untapped market for perhaps 300 rocket launches from now through 2030, worth perhaps $22.2 billion at the most recent advertised launch cost for Falcon 9. No one else can launch these payloads, but SpaceX could if it wanted to. Is Elon Musk -- the man who scrambled to find a way to save just $6 million -- really going to let $22.2 billion "smash into the ocean" without attempting to catch it?

I think not.

Admittedly, it remains to be seen exactly what Musk will do. Perhaps he'll tweak the design of his Starship rocket (currently optimized for disbursing flat Starlink satellites like a Pez dispenser) so some of them can carry other companies' payloads while others carry Starlink and AI data center satellites exclusively. But I think it's just as likely that once Musk is convinced there's an untapped market for Falcon that's worth multiple billions of dollars -- all his for the taking -- he'll relent on retiring Falcon 9 and permit that rocket to keep flying alongside Starship.

Don't count Falcon 9 out just yet. So long as a market exists, SpaceX will find a way to service it.

Rich Smith has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.