Private space launch services company Rocket Lab has unveiled its GHOST (Global Hypersonic & Orbital Spaceport Technology) self-contained mobile launch system, capable of placing payloads in orbit or enabling suborbital launches from virtually anywhere on Earth.
Designed to accommodate the company’s Electron and HASTE rockets, the company said GHOST’s “launch-anywhere, launch-anytime” capability can support multi-launch flight campaigns for commercial applications. Rocket Lab said the system’s versatility also offers benefits for “critical” national security missions.
In science fiction, rockets can launch spacecraft from just about anywhere. However, until recently, most launches have occurred at dedicated, government-owned and operated facilities. Even the relatively recent proliferation of private launch services companies promising cheaper, faster alternatives hasn’t reduced the need for a launch facility specially designed to send rockets into orbit.
Now, Rocket Lab says the company has created an all-in-one launch solution called GHOST that can accommodate rocket launches from seemingly anywhere.
For example, when announcing the formal unveiling of GHOST, the company said the entire system can be packaged in standard shipping containers. This includes all the hardware to launch complete rockets and the ground support infrastructure needed to complete single-launch missions or multi-launch campaigns.
Perhaps most critically, the system can be shipped to any destination for customized launch services worldwide. If the already scheduled real-world inaugural launches prove the claims, that launch-location versatility could give Rocket Lab a technological edge over its private space launch competitors.
When unveiling GHOST, Rocket Lab also announced its first launch site. Dubbed Rocket Lab Complex 4, GHOST’s new home will be at the Pacific Spaceport Complex at Kodiak, Alaska. The company said this inaugural site will include two distinct launch pads for “high-frequency launch campaigns.”
The new site will join the already operational Launch Complex 1 in New Zealand and Launch Complexes 2 and 3 in Virginia. The company said that taken together, Rocket Lab now controls six total launch pads “across two hemispheres.” Along with its reported mobility, the company emphasized GHOST’s ability to accommodate both Electron and HASTE.
“GHOST delivers a dual-launch capability across new locations, allowing Rocket Lab to expand the mission profiles of both vehicles and meet increasing international demand for orbital and suborbital sovereign launch capability,” the company explained.
Rocket Lab also said that the mobile launch platform is “purpose-built to support responsive launch needs and time-critical national security missions, enabling rapid site activation and simultaneous launch possibilities.”
The company expects to conduct its first GHOST-supported launch from Launch Complex 4 in 2027, including launches announced in July for the U.S. Space Force.
“The size and scale of this contract reflects the Space Force’s confidence in our ability to meet their urgent national security demands with speed, responsiveness, and scale, and we’re proud to provide the high-frequency launch capacity required to keep the U.S. ahead of global threats,” company CEO Sir Peter Beck said at the time of the announcement.
After noting that Rocket Lab has been “leading the field in small launch for missile defense and national security for years,” Sir Beck heralded GHOST’s seemingly sci-fi-sounding ability to launch a rocket into space from virtually anywhere in the world as another example of the launch service reliability and repeatability.
“Creating GHOST is about packaging that up into a deployable system that can serve the world’s most important programs from wherever those missions need,” Sir Beck said. “Whether it’s for missile defense and deterrence, or opening up more trajectories, orbital missions, and sovereign launch capabilities in allied nations, GHOST is the answer to launching anywhere, anytime, and without compromise.”
Christopher Plain is a Science Fiction and Fantasy novelist and has spent the last six years as Associate News Editor and Head Science Writer at The Debrief. Follow and connect with him on X, learn about his books at plainfiction.com, or email him at christopher@thedebrief.org.
A recent study documented a participant using an AI model to simulate a conversation with her late grandmother. According to her report, the experience offered a sense of closure that she had not experienced before.
This interaction was one of sixteen documented in a study published in the Proceedings of the 2026 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference. The research provides some of the first empirical data on how individuals respond to the opportunity to communicate with AI representations of deceased loved ones.
Researchers at the University of Colorado Boulder call these AI agents ‘generative ghosts.’ These systems use data such as writing, voice recordings, or photographs from the deceased to create simulated conversations. Some platforms, such as Project December and Séance AI, generate text-based versions of journal entries and messages. Others, such as HereAfterAI, include voice and images. A few companies have also developed virtual reality experiences that let users interact with holographic representations of loved ones.
Jack Manning, the PhD candidate in Information Science who led the study, expected the sessions to feel unsettling. “We originally thought it might feel very Black Mirror creepy to people and make them uncomfortable,” he said. “I ended up being completely wrong. People thought it was amazing.”
The study included 16 participants, aged 22 to 50, each of whom joined a Zoom interview about a deceased relative or friend. During the session, a facilitator led the conversation while another researcher entered details into a large language model, generating an AI representation of the deceased in real time.
Each participant interacted with two versions of the AI model for about twenty minutes each. One version spoke as the deceased, using the first person, while the other described the person in the third person. A facilitator stayed present to offer support if the conversation became emotionally difficult.
The results indicated a clear preference for the version that spoke as the deceased individual, rather than about them. Researchers described this as a preference for ‘reincarnation’ over ‘representation.’
Participants tended to overlook factual mistakes or made-up details from the AI. What mattered more was whether the AI captured the right tone and language. If the model used words or phrases that felt out of character, people were more likely to disconnect from the experience. The study found that getting the voice and manner right was more important than perfect factual accuracy.
How the AI communicated also shaped the experience. Participants preferred short, to-the-point sentences and even the use of emojis, rather than the longer, more formal responses that AI models often produce. This suggests that future versions of these systems should pay close attention to conversational style.
All sixteen participants indicated that they would be willing to use the technology again. However, most also expressed concerns about the potential risks of individuals in grief accessing these AI systems without supervision.
Lead researcher Jack Manning said his own experiences with loss have shaped his view of the risks and benefits of AI grief tools. He acknowledged that negative outcomes are possible but also noted that the technology could help some users find a sense of closure and peace.
Jed Brubaker, the study’s senior author and an associate professor of Information Science, said the lab took on the work precisely because the field had outpaced the research. “To our knowledge, we are conducting the first user experience studies of simulated AI ghosts,” he said.
The research team intends to involve mental health professionals in future studies. The next phase will evaluate the psychological risks and benefits of prolonged use of AI grief tools to ensure that empirical research guides product development.
Generative ghost technology is already available through commercial platforms, and people are actively using these systems. The study highlights that voice, tone, and pacing are often more important to users than factual accuracy. As the technology develops, researchers are working to address the challenges of providing appropriate safeguards and responsible design.
Austin Burgess is a writer and researcher with a background in sales, marketing, and data analytics. He holds an MBA, a Bachelor of Science in Business Administration, and a data analytics certification. His work focuses on breaking scientific developments, with an emphasis on emerging biology, cognitive neuroscience, and archaeological discoveries.
Login