News
Elon Musk pegs SpaceX BFR program at $5B as NASA’s rocket booster nears $5B in cost overruns
At the same time as NASA’s overrun-stricken Space Launch System (SLS) continues to limp towards its continuously delayed launch debut, now tentatively expected no earlier than (NET) 2021, SpaceX is forging ahead with the development of an equivalently capable launch vehicle known as BFR, comprised of a spaceship (BFS) and booster (BFB).
During a September 17th update to the next-gen SpaceX rocket’s steady progress, CEO Elon Musk offered a rough cost estimate of $5B to complete its development – no less than $2B and no more than $10B. According to NASA’s Office of the Inspector General (OIG), Boeing – primary contractor for NASA’s SLS “Core Stage” or booster – is all but guaranteed to burn through a minimum of $8.9B between 2012 and the rocket’s tentative 2021 launch debut.
NASA is finally (officially) acknowledging that EM-1, the maiden launch of SLS, will slip until at least June 2020. Sources tell us to expect another slip to 2021, official or not.https://t.co/CYf9SqbhBY
— Eric Berger (@SciGuySpace) October 3, 2018
Originally contracted in 2014 to complete SLS booster development, production, and preparation by 2018 at a cost of $4.2B, Boeing has overrun its budget by a bit less than 50% (up to $6.2B) and overshot its scheduled launch debut by more than 2.5 years. Per an October 10th audit of the SLS booster program, NASA OIG has reasonably concluded that Boeing will pass that $6.2B expenditure estimate – meant to last until 2021 – in December 2018, meaning that at least an additional $2.7B will be required from NASA between now and 2021 if SLS is to have a chance at launching that year.
In other words, compared to Boeing’s first serious 2014 contract for the SLS Core Stages – $4.2B to complete Core Stages 1 and 2 and launch EM-1 in Nov. 2017 – the company will ultimately end up 215% over-budget ($4.2B to $8.9B) and ~40 months behind schedule (42 months to 80+ months from contract award to completion). Meanwhile, as OIG notes, NASA has continued to give Boeing impossibly effusive and glowing performance reviews to the tune of $323 million in “award fees”, with grades that would – under the contracting book NASA itself wrote – imply that Boeing SLS Core Stage work has been reliably under budget and ahead of schedule (it’s not).
-
- SLS Block 1. (NASA)
-
- An overview of SLS. (NASA)
-
- Rockets are perhaps even more capital intensive. (SpaceX)
-
- BFR 2018’s Spaceship, BFS. (SpaceX)
The “Satisfactory” Stuff
In reality, Boeing has not once been under budget or ahead of schedule during any of 6+ NASA performance reviews.
“Boeing should have received a “satisfactory” rating for [two review periods]; a “good” rating for [one review period]; and an “unsatisfactory” rating (no award fee) for [the 2017 review period].”
Instead, NASA has given Boeing three “Very Good” (nearly perfect) reviews and three “Excellent” (perfect) reviews over the last 6 years, ultimately dispersing $323M of pure-profit “award fees” thanks to those grades, while the OIG firmly disputes Boing’s worthiness for at least $65M of that sum.
It is pretty pathetic when the only response that @BoeingSpace can muster via @BKingDC at its #politicospace PR effort in response to a damning @NASA_SLS report by @NASAOIG is to dump on the Saturn V – a rocket that actually flew – and worked – half a century ago. https://t.co/daN91bzwpC
— NASA Watch (@NASAWatch) October 12, 2018
Boeing – recently brought to light as the likely source of a spate of egregiously counterfactual op-eds published with the intention of dirtying SpaceX’s image – also took it upon itself to sponsor what could be described as responses to NASA OIG’s scathing October 10th SLS audit. Hilariously, a Politico newsletter sponsored by Boeing managed to explicitly demean and belittle the Apollo-era Saturn V rocket as a “rickety metal bucket built with 1960s technology”, of which Boeing was the core stage’s prime contractor.
At the same time, that newsletter described SLS as a rocket that will be “light years ahead of thespacecraft [sic] that NASA astronauts used to get to the moon 50 years ago.” At present, the only clear way SLS is or will be “light years” ahead – as much a measure of time as it is of distance – of Saturn V is by continuing the rocket’s trend of endless delays. Perhaps NASA astronomers will soon be able to judge exactly how many “light years ahead” SLS is by measuring the program’s redshift or blueshift with one of several ground- and space-based telescopes.
Ultimately, this is a particularly effective bit of self-mockery in the context of rationale lately used by Boeing and NASA to shrug off the jaw-dropping Core Stage contract’s underperformance, missteps, schedule slips, and budget overruns, namely that building big, complex rockets is hard. NASA and Boeing, neither of which have any meaningful experience building big, complex rockets – aside from Saturn IB, Saturn V, and the Space Shuttle – thus should be given a break for reliably and dramatically underestimating the difficulties of doing so in the 21st century.
One of the most breathtaking things about the new SLS report is the response by NASA's Gerstenmaier. Essentially, he says, this a is a big, complex rocket. And it's hard to build this stuff.https://t.co/ou8SFhji6a
— Eric Berger (@SciGuySpace) October 10, 2018
Simultaneously, Boeing and NASA still continue to act as if they are the foremost global experts of building extremely large rockets and continue to throw pile upon pile of taxpayer billions at overpromised attempts to prove as much. It’s no more than a masochistic dream to imagine what could have been or might be if NASA instead redirected those billions towards US aerospace companies with track records of success through fixed-cost contracts or straight-up private funding (SpaceX and Blue Origin, primarily), but it’s often hard not to at least think about the possibilities.
For prompt updates, on-the-ground perspectives, and unique glimpses of SpaceX’s rocket recovery fleet check out our brand new LaunchPad and LandingZone newsletters!
News
Tesla Semi pricing revealed after company uncovers trim levels
This is a step up from the prices that were revealed back in 2017, but with inflation and other factors, it is no surprise Tesla could not come through on the numbers it planned to offer nine years ago. When the Semi was unveiled in November 2017, Tesla had three pricing levels:
Tesla Semi pricing appears to have been revealed after the company started communicating with the entities interested in purchasing its all-electric truck. The pricing details come just days after Tesla revealed it planned to offer two trim levels and uncovered the specs of each.
After CEO Elon Musk said the Semi would enter volume production this year, Tesla revealed trim levels shortly thereafter. Offering a Standard Range and a Long Range trim will fit the needs of many companies that plan to use the truck for local and regional deliveries.
Tesla Semi lines up for $165M in California incentives ahead of mass production
It will also be a good competitor to the all-electric semi trucks already available from companies like Volvo.
With the release of specs, Tesla helped companies see the big picture in terms of what the Semi could do to benefit their business. However, pricing information was not available.
A new report from Electrek states that Tesla has been communicating with those interested companies and is pricing the Standard Range at $250,000 per unit, while the Long Range is priced at $290,000. These prices come before taxes and destination fees.
$TSLA – TESLA IS QUOTING $290,000 FOR ITS 500-MILES ELECTRIC SEMI TRUCK – ELECTREK
— *Walter Bloomberg (@DeItaone) February 10, 2026
This is a step up from the prices that were revealed back in 2017, but with inflation and other factors, it is no surprise Tesla could not come through on the numbers it planned to offer nine years ago. When the Semi was unveiled in November 2017, Tesla had three pricing levels:
- $150,000 for a 300-mile range version
- $180,000 for a 500-mile range version
- $200,000 for a limited “Founders Series” edition; full upfront payment required for priority production and limited to just 1,000 units
Tesla has not officially released any specific information regarding pricing on the Semi, but it is not surprising that it has not done so. The Semi is a vehicle that will be built for businesses, and pricing information is usually reserved for those who place reservations. This goes for most products of this nature.
The Semi will be built at a new, dedicated production facility in Sparks, Nevada, which Tesla broke ground on in 2024. The factory was nearly complete in late 2025, and executives confirmed that the first “online builds” were targeted for that same time.
Meaningful output is scheduled for this year, as Musk reiterated earlier this week that it would enter mass production this year. At full capacity, the factory will build 50,000 units annually.
News
Tesla executive moves on after 13 years: ‘It has been a privilege to serve’
“It is challenging to encapsulate 13 years in a single post. The journey at Tesla has been one of continuous evolution. From the technical intricacies of designing, building, and operating one of the world’s largest AI clusters to impactful contributions in IT, Security, Sales, and Service, it has been a privilege to serve,” Jegannathan said in the post.
Tesla executive Raj Jegannathan is moving on from the company after 13 years, he announced on LinkedIn on Monday.
“It is challenging to encapsulate 13 years in a single post. The journey at Tesla has been one of continuous evolution. From the technical intricacies of designing, building, and operating one of the world’s largest AI clusters to impactful contributions in IT, Security, Sales, and Service, it has been a privilege to serve,” Jegannathan said in the post.
After starting as a Senior Staff Engineer in Fremont back in November 2012, Jegannathan slowly worked his way through the ranks at Tesla. His most recent role was Vice President of IT/AI Infrastructure, Business Apps, and Infosec.
However, it was reported last year that Jegannathan had taken on a new role, which was running the North American sales team following the departure of Troy Jones, who had held the position previously.
While Jegannathan’s LinkedIn does not mention this position specifically, it seemed to be accurate, considering Tesla had not explicitly promoted any other person to the role.
It is a big loss for Tesla, but not a destructive departure. Jegannathan was one of the few company executives who answered customer and fan questions on X, a unique part of the Tesla ownership experience.
Tesla to offer Full Self-Driving gifting program: here’s how it will work
It currently remains unclear if Jegannathan was removed from the position or if he left under his own accord.
“As I move on, I do so with a full heart and excitement for what lies ahead. Thank you, Tesla, for this wonderful opportunity!” he concluded.
The departure marks a continuing trend of executives leaving the company, as the past 24 months have seen some significant turnover at the executive level.
Tesla has shown persistently elevated executive turnover over the past two years, as names like Drew Baglino, Rohan Patel, Rebecca Tinucci, Daniel Ho, Omead Afshar, Milan Kovac, and Siddhant Awasthi have all been notable names to exit the company in the past two years.
There are several things that could contribute to this. Many skeptics will point to Elon Musk’s politics, but that is not necessarily the case.
Tesla is a difficult, but rewarding place to work. It is a company that requires a lot of commitment, and those who are halfway in might not choose to stick around. Sacrificing things like time with family might not outweigh the demands of Tesla and Musk.
Additionally, many of these executives have made a considerable amount of money thanks to stock packages the company offers to employees. While many might be looking for new opportunities, some might be interested in an early retirement.
Tesla is also in the process of transitioning away from its most notable division, automotive. While it still plans to manufacture cars in the millions, it is turning more focus toward robotics and autonomy, and these plans might not align with what some executives might want for themselves. There are a wide variety of factors in the decision to leave a job, so it is important not to immediately jump to controversy.
News
Lemonade launches Tesla FSD insurance program in Oregon
The program was announced by Lemonade co-founder Shai Wininger on social media platform X.
Tesla drivers in Oregon can now receive significant insurance discounts when using FSD, following the launch of Lemonade’s new Autonomous Car insurance program.
The program was announced by Lemonade co-founder Shai Wininger on social media platform X.
Lemonade launches FSD-based insurance in Oregon
In a post on X, Wininger confirmed that Lemondade’s Autonomous Car insurance product for Tesla is now live in Oregon. The program allows eligible Tesla owners to receive roughly 50% off insurance costs for every mile driven using Tesla’s FSD system.
“And… we’re ON. @Lemonade_Inc’s Autonomous Car for @Tesla FSD is now live in Oregon. Tesla drivers in Oregon can now get ~50% off their Tesla FSD-driven miles + the best car insurance experience in the US, bar none,” Wininger wrote in his post.
As per Lemonade on its official website, the program is built on Tesla’s safety data, which indicates that miles driven using FSD are approximately twice as safe as those driven manually. As a result, Lemonade prices those miles at a lower rate. The insurer noted that as FSD continues to improve, associated discounts could increase over time.
How Lemonade tracks FSD miles
Lemonade’s FSD discount works through a direct integration with Tesla vehicles, enabled only with a driver’s explicit permission. Once connected, the system distinguishes between miles driven manually and those driven using FSD, applying the discount automatically to qualifying miles.
There is no minimum FSD usage requirement. Drivers who use FSD occasionally still receive discounted rates for those miles, while non-FSD miles are billed at competitive standard rates. Lemonade also emphasized that coverage and claims handling remain unchanged regardless of whether a vehicle is operating under manual control or FSD at the time of an incident.
The program is currently available only to Teslas equipped with Hardware 4 or newer, running firmware version 2025.44.25.5 or later. Lemonade also allows policyholders to bundle Tesla insurance with renters, homeowners, pet, or life insurance policies for additional savings.
Tesla Semi pricing revealed after company uncovers trim levels
Tesla executive moves on after 13 years: ‘It has been a privilege to serve’
