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!
Elon Musk
Tesla nears closure of Full Self-Driving purchasing option
The move to bring FSD to this type of purchasing program comes after CEO Elon Musk noted in January that Tesla would move away from the outright purchase option.
Tesla is nearing the closure of its Full Self-Driving outright purchasing option, which will be removed on February 14, meaning Saturday will be the last time it can be bought as a non-subscription.
Tesla is aiming to move its Full Self-Driving suite to a subscription-only platform, a move that will enable people to only pay monthly for the semi-autonomous driving functionality.
The move to bring FSD to this type of purchasing program comes after CEO Elon Musk noted in January that Tesla would move away from the outright purchase option.
It is currently priced at $8,000 for the outright option to use Full Self-Driving, a substantial decrease compared to the $15,000 it was priced at one time. For the monthly subscription, it is just $99 per month, but that price will change, likely increasing as things get more advanced.
Tesla is overhauling its Full Self-Driving subscription for easier access
We say it will likely increase because there is no indication of how Tesla will price FSD. There has been some speculation that Tesla could utilize a tiered system to price FSD, which would potentially allow owners to pick and choose a set of features that would be most ideal for them.
This would potentially introduce an even more affordable option for FSD use, but this is unconfirmed. The reason many say this could be an option for Tesla is the fact that if the price goes up further, the take rate, which is currently around 12 percent at its most recent estimate, could be lower.
Musk needs 10 million active Full Self-Driving subscriptions to unlock one of the tranches of his newest compensation package.
The move to a subscription-only platform has its positives and negatives, and owners have been more than vocal about these since Musk confirmed the move.
Positives
- Lower barrier to entry and higher potential adoption
- Financially better for many users
- Easier transfers and brand loyalty
- Predictable recurring revenue for Tesla
- Access to the latest features
Negatives
- Higher long-term cost for loyal/long-term owners
- No true “ownership” or permanence
- Risk of future price hikes or even deactivation
- Perceived as of less value
- Impact on resale and used market
Overall, there is a split among the Tesla community in terms of what they see as the “right” way to handle this. Tesla is likely to shed more details on what its plans for the subscription-only platform will be, including pricing, in the coming weeks.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk’s Boring Company selected for Universal Orlando tunnel project
The underground transport tunnel is designed to address the persistent gridlock surrounding International Drive.
Elon Musk’s The Boring Company has been selected for a proposed underground transit system connecting Universal Orlando Resort and the newly opened Universal Epic Universe.
The underground transport tunnel is designed to address the persistent gridlock surrounding International Drive.
As noted in a blooloop report, Universal’s Shingle Creek Transit and Utility Community Development District approved a resolution showing its intent to designate The Boring Company as the contractor for the project.
The agreement covers the full scope of the project, from the tunnel’s design, construction, and maintenance. The project has also been described in public documents as a “point-to-point innovative transportation” initiative with a 25-year agreement.
The proposed Boring Company tunnels would directly link Universal’s existing parks with Epic Universe, which sits roughly three miles away from Universal Orlando Resort. Today, buses are the only direct connection between the two destinations.
Project requirements were quite stringent. Bidders were required to demonstrate at least $75 million in bonding capacity, have a minimum of seven years of operational experience, and show prior delivery of a comparable project valued at $25 million or more within the past 15 years. The Boring Company, thanks in no small part to the Vegas Loop, meets these requirements.
The Orlando selection adds to The Boring Company’s growing portfolio of Loop-style systems. In Las Vegas, the Las Vegas Convention Center Loop has transported more than two million passengers in Tesla vehicles through underground tunnels since 2021. The greater Vegas Loop system is also under construction.
For now, residents in the area seem enthusiastic about the upcoming project. In a comment to Fox35, residents noted that the tunnels could improve traffic in the area.
“We are very congested at certain times and certain hours and that would certainly help with people not having to budget their time,” Mary Walters-Clark, a resident, stated. Another resident, Scott Heinz, echoed similar sentiments. “I think it would be a new opportunity to lessen traffic load and good for visitors as well,” he said.
The tunneling startup has started bringing its Loop projects to international locations. It recently signed a memorandum of understanding with Dubai’s Roads and Transport Authority to explore the development of a 17-kilometer underground Loop network beneath Dubai.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk tops Forbes’ list of America’s 250 greatest innovators
The ranking places Musk at the top of modern American innovation.
Elon Musk has been ranked No. 1 on Forbes’ inaugural list of America’s 250 Greatest Innovators. The ranking places Musk at the top of modern American innovation as the publication kicks off a series celebrating the nation’s 250th anniversary.
Forbes described innovation as “the grease in the economic engine” and the force that transforms industries and creates new ones. The publication highlighted that its honorees are not just inventors, but business leaders who successfully bring breakthroughs to market.
Musk, 54, was ranked No. 1 in this year’s list. Forbes noted that he is “the only person in history to have founded (or grown from nearly nothing) five companies, each with multibillion-dollar valuations, each in a different industry.” Those companies include Tesla, SpaceX, Neuralink, xAI, and The Boring Company.
Forbes’ methodology began with nearly 1,000 nominees submitted by its reporters. A panel of judges, including venture capitalist Jim Breyer, journalist Kara Swisher, and strategy expert Rita McGrath, ranked candidates based on creativity, breadth, engagement, disruption, and commercial impact. Artificial intelligence tools, including ChatGPT and Gemini, were also used to assess candidates before editors finalized the rankings.
The publication noted that more than one-third of the list consists of women and people of color, reflecting shifts in innovation and entrepreneurship over time. All individuals listed are also American citizens, though many were born abroad, including Musk himself. Musk was born in Pretoria, South Africa.
Ranked No. 2 is Jeff Bezos, 61, who Forbes credited with upending America’s $7.4 trillion retail industry through Amazon before pioneering cloud computing with Amazon Web Services. The publication highlighted that Bezos now focuses on space exploration through Blue Origin and artificial intelligence manufacturing systems at Prometheus.
At No. 3 is Bill Gates, 70, who helped launch the personal computing revolution and built Microsoft into the dominant force in workplace software. Forbes also highlighted Gates’ reinvention at age 50 as a data-driven philanthropist, including his role in helping eradicate polio from India.
Tesla nears closure of Full Self-Driving purchasing option
Elon Musk’s Boring Company selected for Universal Orlando tunnel project
