News
SpaceX’s upgraded Starship set for test flight despite sore NASA contract losers
Within the last week, while SpaceX has been diligently working to ready an upgraded Starship prototype for its first launch, former competitors Blue Origin and Dynetics – both of which recently lost a historic NASA Moon lander contract to SpaceX – have filed “protests” and forced the space agency to freeze work (and funds).
That means that NASA is now legally unable to use funds or resources related to its Human Lander System (HLS) program or the $2.9 billion contract it awarded SpaceX on April 16th to develop a variant of Starship to return humanity to the Moon. However, just like SpaceX has already spent a great deal of its own time and money on Starship development and – more recently – a rapid-fire series of launches, the company appears to have no intention of letting sore losers hamper its rocket factory or test campaign.
Instead, on the same two days Blue Origin and Dynetics loudly filed official protests with the US Government Accountability Office (GAO), SpaceX performed two back-to-back static fire tests with a Starship prototype and Raptor engines outfitted with “hundreds of improvements.” Technical challenges and unsavory weather conditions forced SpaceX to call off a launch planned sometime last week but the company now appears to be on track to launch Starship prototype SN15 as early as Tuesday, May 4th.
In principle, the ability for companies to protest US government contracting decisions is a necessity and (nominally) a net good but it can easily be misused – and often in damaging ways. In the case of Blue Origin and Dynetics, it’s difficult not to perceive both protests as examples of the latter.
Blue Origin effectively disagrees with every single major point made and conclusion drawn by NASA’s Source Selection Authority (Kathy Lueders) and a separate panel of experts – often to the point that the company is strongly implying that it understands NASA’s contracting process better than the space agency itself. Blue Origin partners Northrop Grumman and Lockheed Martin are both partially or fully responsible for several of their own catastrophic acquisition boondoggles (F-35, Orion, SLS, James Webb Space Telescope, etc.) and are part of the military-industrial complex primarily responsible for turning US military and aerospace procurement into the quagmire of political interests, quasi-monopolies, and loopholes it is today.
The primary argument is generally shared by both protestors. In essence, Dynetics [p. 23; PDF] and Blue Origin [PDF] believe that it was unfair or improper for NASA to select just a single provider from the three companies or groups that competed. They argue that downselecting to one provider in lieu of budget shortfalls changed the procurement process and competition so much that NASA should have effectively called it quits and restarted the entire five-month process. Blue Origin and Dynetics also both imply that they were somehow blindsided by NASA’s concerns about a Congressional funding shortfall.
In reality, NASA could scarcely have been clearer that it was exceptionally sensitive about HLS funding and extremely motivated to attempt to return humans to the Moon by 2024 with or without the full support of Congress – albeit in fewer words. As Lueders herself noted in the HLS Option A award selection statement, the solicitation Blue, Dynetics, and SpaceX responded to states – word for word – that “the overall number of awards will be dependent upon funding availability and evaluation results.”
Additionally, implications that NASA somehow blindsided offerors with its lack of funding are woefully ignorant at best and consciously disingenuous at worse. Anyone with even the slightest awareness of the history of large-scale NASA programs would know that the space agency’s budget is all but exclusively determined by Congress each year and liable to change just as frequently if political winds shift. Short of blackmailing members of Congress or wistfully hoping that other avenues of legal political influence and partnership actually lead to desired funding and priorities appearing in appropriations legislation, NASA knows the future of its budget about as well as anyone else with access to the internet and a rudimentary awareness of history and current events.
It became clear that Congress was likely to drastically underfund NASA’s HLS program as early as November 2020 – weeks before HLS Option A proposals were due. The latest appropriations bill was passed on January 3rd, 2021, providing NASA $850 million of the ~$3.4 billion it requested for HLS. Historically, NASA’s experience with the Commercial Crew Program – public knowledge available to anyone – likely made it clear to the agency that it could not trust Congress to fund its priorities in good faith when half a decade of drastic underfunding ultimately delayed the critical program by several years. That damage was done by merely halving NASA Commercial Crew budget request from 2010 to 2013, whereas Congress had already set itself on a path to provide barely a quarter of the HLS funds NASA asked for in the weeks before Moon lander proposals were due.
Ultimately, the protests filed by Blue Origin and Dynetics are packed to the brim with petty axe-grinding, attempts to paint SpaceX in a negative light, and a general lack of indication that either company is operating in good faith. Instead, their protests appear all but guaranteed to fail while simultaneously forcing NASA to freeze HLS work and delay related disbursements for up to 100 days. Given that SpaceX is now technically working to design, build, qualify, and fly an uncrewed Lunar Starship prototype by 2023 and a crewed demonstration landing by 2024, 100 days represents a full 7-10% of the time that’s available to complete that extraordinary task.
Ironically, the protests made by Blue Origin and Dynetics have already helped demonstrate why NASA’s decision – especially in light of unambiguous budgetary restrictions – to sole-source its HLS Moon lander contract to SpaceX was an astute one. Had a victorious Blue Origin or Dynetics been in a similar position to SpaceX, it’s almost impossible to imagine either team continuing work to a significant degree in lieu of NASA funding or direction. SpaceX, on the other hand, hasn’t missed a beat and looks set to continue Starship development, production, and testing around the clock regardless of NASA’s capacity to help.
In other words, with a little luck, the actual schedule impact of a maximum 100-day work and funding freeze should be a tiny fraction of what it could have been if NASA had selected an HLS provider more interested in profit margins and stock buybacks than creating a sustainable path for humanity’s expansion beyond Earth.
News
Tesla FSD user in China shares insights after months of use: “Not a single safety intervention”
Tesla FSD users in China tend to push the system to its absolute limits.
Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (FSD) system appears to be quietly winning over drivers in China. Although its rollout in February 2025 has not been followed by additional notable updates, recent accounts from local drivers suggest that Tesla’s approach to full self-driving may be outperforming its rivals on Chinese roads.
Tesla’s FSD exhibits smooth and cautious performance on real roads
As noted in a post shared by EV watcher @ray4tesla, a driver who has used Tesla’s FSD in China for two months described a well-calibrated, human-like driving experience. The driver also noted that Tesla’s FSD system is very cautious, perhaps even too careful at times.
“On narrow roads, it slows down appropriately; on major roads, it picks up speed. When there are a lot of pedestrians or electric scooters, it’s overly cautious — almost too polite,” the driver wrote.
Even more interestingly, the driver emphasized that despite frequent usage, there has been zero safety interventions since FSD was enabled in the vehicle. “In the two months I’ve been using FSD, I haven’t had even a single safety intervention,” the driver wrote.
Huawei ADS test triggers multiple safety takeovers
The user compared FSD to Huawei’s ADS system, which they tested for about 90 minutes in an Aito M9 SUV. According to the driver, Huawei’s ADS struggled to deliver consistent performance.
“Then I tried the M9 (Huawei ADS) for an hour and a half. When it needed to speed up, it lagged; and on tight, narrow roads, it suddenly accelerated — honestly, it was pretty scary. The acceleration and braking felt jerky, and you could clearly tell it was being driven by a machine (robotic vibe),” the driver wrote.
The user reported four safety interventions with Huawei’s ADS system within just 30 minutes while driving on rough, construction-heavy roads. “In construction zones and on rough roads, there were four safety interventions in just 30 minutes. And if you know what a ‘safety intervention’ means — that’s essentially four near-collisions,” the driver added.
While anecdotal, the account from the Tesla owner is quite significant since FSD users in China tend to push the system to its absolute limits. Since its rollout earlier this year, Tesla drivers in China have been recorded testing FSD on unpaved mountain roads, extremely narrow streets, busy cities, and wooded paths that barely have any road at all, among others.
Elon Musk
Tesla begins expanding Robotaxi access: here’s how you can ride
You can ride in a Tesla Robotaxi by heading to its website and filling out the interest form. The company is hand-picking some of those who have done this to gain access to the fleet.
Tesla has begun expanding Robotaxi access beyond the initial small group it offered rides to in late June, as it launched the driverless platform in Austin, Texas.
The small group of people enjoying the Robotaxi ride-hailing service is now growing, as several Austin-area residents are receiving invitations to test out the platform for themselves.
The first rides took place on June 22, and despite a very small number of very manageable and expected hiccups, Tesla Robotaxi was widely successful with its launch.
Tesla Robotaxi riders tout ‘smooth’ experience in first reviews of driverless service launch
However, Tesla is expanding the availability of the ride-hailing service to those living in Austin and its surrounding areas, hoping to gather more data and provide access to those who will utilize it on a daily basis.
Many of the people Tesla initially invited, including us, are not local to the Austin area.
There are a handful of people who are, but Tesla was evidently looking for more stable data collection, as many of those early invitees headed back to where they live.
The first handful of invitations in the second round of the Robotaxi platform’s Early Access Program are heading out to Austin locals:
I just got a @robotaxi invite! Super excited to go try the service out! pic.twitter.com/n9mN35KKFU
— Ethan McKanna (@ethanmckanna) July 1, 2025
Tesla likely saw an influx of data during the first week, as many traveled far and wide to say they were among the first to test the Robotaxi platform.
Now that the first week and a half of testing is over, Tesla is expanding invites to others. Many of those who have been chosen to gain access to the Robotaxi app and the ride-hailing service state that they simply filled out the interest form on the Robotaxi page of Tesla’s website.
That’s the easiest way you will also gain access, so be sure to fill out that form if you have any interest in riding in Robotaxi.
Tesla will continue to utilize data accumulated from these rides to enable more progress, and eventually, it will lead to even more people being able to hail rides from the driverless platform.
With more success, Tesla will start to phase out some of the Safety Monitors and Supervisors it is using to ensure things run smoothly. CEO Elon Musk said Tesla could start increasing the number of Robotaxis to monitors within the next couple of months.
A Tesla analyst today said that investors should not lose sight of what is truly important in the grand scheme of being a shareholder, and that any near-term drama between CEO Elon Musk and U.S. President Donald Trump should not outshine the progress made by the company.
Gene Munster of Deepwater Management said that Tesla’s progress in autonomy is a much larger influence and a significantly bigger part of the company’s story than any disagreement between political policies.
Munster appeared on CNBC‘s “Closing Bell” yesterday to reiterate this point:
“One thing that is critical for Tesla investors to remember is that what’s going on with the business, with autonomy, the progress that they’re making, albeit early, is much bigger than any feud that is going to happen week-to-week between the President and Elon. So, I understand the reaction, but ultimately, I think that cooler heads will prevail. If they don’t, autonomy is still coming, one way or the other.”
BREAKING: GENE MUNSTER SAYS — $TSLA AUTONOMY IS “MUCH BIGGER” THAN ANY FEUD 👀
He says robotaxis are coming regardless ! pic.twitter.com/ytpPcwUTFy
— TheSonOfWalkley (@TheSonOfWalkley) July 2, 2025
This is a point that other analysts like Dan Ives of Wedbush and Cathie Wood of ARK Invest also made yesterday.
On two occasions over the past month, Musk and President Trump have gotten involved in a very public disagreement over the “Big Beautiful Bill,” which officially passed through the Senate yesterday and is making its way to the House of Representatives.
Musk is upset with the spending in the bill, while President Trump continues to reiterate that the Tesla CEO is only frustrated with the removal of an “EV mandate,” which does not exist federally, nor is it something Musk has expressed any frustration with.
In fact, Musk has pushed back against keeping federal subsidies for EVs, as long as gas and oil subsidies are also removed.
Nevertheless, Ives and Wood both said yesterday that they believe the political hardship between Musk and President Trump will pass because both realize the world is a better place with them on the same team.
Munster’s perspective is that, even though Musk’s feud with President Trump could apply near-term pressure to the stock, the company’s progress in autonomy is an indication that, in the long term, Tesla is set up to succeed.
Tesla launched its Robotaxi platform in Austin on June 22 and is expanding access to more members of the public. Austin residents are now reporting that they have been invited to join the program.
Tesla FSD user in China shares insights after months of use: “Not a single safety intervention”
Tesla begins expanding Robotaxi access: here’s how you can ride
Tesla analyst issues stern warning to investors: forget Trump-Musk feud
-
Elon Musk3 days agoTesla investors will be shocked by Jim Cramer’s latest assessment
-
News1 week agoTesla Robotaxi’s biggest challenge seems to be this one thing
-
Elon Musk2 weeks agoElon Musk slams Bloomberg’s shocking xAI cash burn claims
-
News2 weeks agoTexas lawmakers urge Tesla to delay Austin robotaxi launch to September
-
Elon Musk2 weeks agoFirst Look at Tesla’s Robotaxi App: features, design, and more
-
Elon Musk2 weeks agoTesla Robotaxis are becoming a common sight on Austin’s public roads
-
Elon Musk2 weeks agoxAI’s Grok 3 partners with Oracle Cloud for corporate AI innovation
-
News2 weeks agoSpaceX and Elon Musk share insights on Starship Ship 36’s RUD