News
NASA is crashing a satellite into an asteroid to gather data about asteroid deflection
The threat of asteroids crashing into Earth isn’t a new concern. We’ve been warned about it by science fiction authors and Hollywood alike, and any kid that’s ever paid attention to dinosaurs in school knows there are bad outcomes when life and chunks of space rock meet up. The space agencies of Europe and the United States are not blind to the threat, thankfully, and they have a multi-part satellite mission in the works directed to gathering real data on how to redirect an asteroid with bad intentions for our planet, i.e., is on a collision course. Specifically, they’re planning on crashing one satellite into an asteroid and studying the effect with another satellite run by the European Space Agency (ESA).
NASA’s part of the mission is called the Double Asteroid Redirection Test (DART), and it will serve as the first demonstration of changing asteroid motion in space. The launch window begins in late December 2020, most likely on track for June 2021, for arrival at its targeted asteroid, Didymos, in early October 2022. Didymos is Greek for “twin”, the name being chosen because it’s a binary system with two bodies: Didymos the asteroid, about a half mile across, and Didymoon the moonlet, about 530 feet across, acting as a moonlet. The two currently have a Sun-centric orbit and will have a distant approach to Earth around the same time as DART’s launch window and then again in 2024.
After reaching the asteroid, DART will enter orbit around Didymoon, and crash into it at a speed of about 4 mi/s (nine times faster than a bullet) to change its speed by a fraction of one percent, an amount measurable by Earth-based telescopes for easy study. Unsurprisingly, the preferred description is “kinetic impact technique” rather than “crash” – maybe even “impact” or “strike”, if we’re avoiding terms that sound random or accidental. The mission is being led by the Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory (JHU/APL) and managed by the Planetary Missions Program Office at Marshall Space Flight Center in Alabama for NASA’s Planetary Defense Coordination Office.
NASA’s DART mission is one of two parts of an overall mission dubbed AIDA (Asteroid Impact & Deflection Assessment). Joining the agency’s Earth-protection venture is the ESA with its Hera spacecraft, named after the Greek goddess of marriage, a probe that will follow up DART’s mission with a detailed survey of the asteroid’s response to the impact. Collected data will help formulate planetary defense plans by providing detailed analysis from DART’s real-time asteroid deflection experiment. Its launch is scheduled for 2023.
Just this month, another part was added to Hera’s mission: CubeSats. This class of tiny satellites is about the size of a briefcase, and they recently made their deep space debut during NASA’s Mars InSight landing. During that mission, twin CubeSats collectively named MarCO followed along on the journey to Mars behind InSight, eventually relaying data during the landing event back to NASA’s Mission Control along with a photo of the red planet. ESA’s CubeSats, named APEX (Asteroid Prospection Explorer) and Juventas, will travel inside Hera, gather data on Didymos and its moonlet, and then both will land on their respective rocks and provide imaging from the surface.
Just to recap: Tiny satellites in a class that students and startups can and have developed and launched will travel into deep space and land on asteroids. This is big news for the democratization of space travel. As emphasized by Paolo Martino, Hera’s lead engineer in ESA’s article announcing the CubeSat mission, “The idea of building CubeSats for deep space is relatively new, but was recently validated by NASA’s InSight landing on Mars last November.”
Using kinetic energy – pure ram/crash force – isn’t the only option NASA is looking at for defending Earth from incoming asteroids. A “gravity tractor” concept would orbit a craft in a way that would change the trajectory due to gravitational tugging. Similar to how our moon has an impact on our tides or the Earth makes the Sun wobble ever so slightly, a satellite orbiting an asteroid would give pushes and pulls to set its course elsewhere.
Unfortunately, a gravity tractor likely wouldn’t be very effective for asteroids large enough to seriously threaten our planet. Also, the techniques for achieving it would require decades to develop and test in space. Laser ablation, or using spacecraft lasers to vaporize asteroid rock to change an asteroid’s course, is another technique NASA has considered, but it might be just as feasible or cost-effective to simply launch projectiles to achieve the same purpose.
Watch the below video for a visual overview of the DART and HERA missions:
Tesla executive Sendil Palani confirmed in a post on social media platform X that Full Self-Driving, despite being the most robust driver assistance program in the United States, still isn’t garnering any interest from lagging competitors.
Tesla has said on several occasions in the past that it has had discussions with a competing carmaker to license its Full Self-Driving suite. While it never confirmed which company it was, many pointed toward Ford as the one Tesla was holding dialogue with.
At the time, Ford CEO Jim Farley and Tesla CEO Elon Musk had a very cordial relationship.
Despite Tesla’s confirmation, which occurred during both the Q2 2023 and Q1 2024 Earnings Calls, no deal was ever reached. Whichever “major OEM” Tesla had talked to did not see the benefit. Even now, Tesla has not found that dance partner, despite leading every company in the U.S. in self-driving efforts by a considerable margin.
Elon Musk says Tesla Robotaxi launch will force companies to license Full Self-Driving
Palani seemed to confirm that Tesla still has not found any company that is remotely interested in licensing FSD, as he said on X that “despite our best efforts to share the technology,” the company has found that it “has not been proven to be easy.”
Licensing FSD has not proven to be easy, despite our best efforts to share the technology. https://t.co/VGYBU7Aduw
— Sendil Palani (@sendilpalani) February 3, 2026
The question came just after one Tesla fan on X asked whether Tesla would continue manufacturing vehicles.
Because Tesla continues to expand its lineup of Model Y, it has plans to build the Cybercab, and there is still an immediate need for passenger vehicles, there is no question that the company plans to continue scaling its production.
However, Palani’s response is interesting, especially considering that it was in response to the question of whether Tesla would keep building cars.
Perhaps if Tesla could license Full Self-Driving to enough companies for the right price, it could simply sell the suite to car companies that are building vehicles, eliminating the need for Tesla to build its own.
While it seems like a reach because of Tesla’s considerable fan base, which is one of the most loyal in the automotive industry, the company could eventually bail on manufacturing and gain an incredible valuation by simply unlocking self-driving for other manufacturers.
The big question regarding why Tesla can’t find another company to license FSD is simply, “Why?”
Do they think they can solve it themselves? Do they not find FSD as valuable or effective? Many of these same companies didn’t bat an eye when Tesla started developing EVs, only to find themselves years behind. This could be a continuing trend.
Tesla executive Lars Moravy appeared today in front of the U.S. Senate Commerce Committee to highlight the importance of modernizing autonomy standards by establishing a federal framework that would reward innovation and keep the country on pace with foreign rivals.
Moravy, who is Tesla’s Vice President of Vehicle Engineering, strongly advocated for Congress to enact a national framework for autonomous vehicle development and deployment, replacing the current patchwork of state-by-state rules.
These rules have slowed progress and kept companies fighting tooth-and-nail with local legislators to operate self-driving projects in controlled areas.
Tesla already has a complete Robotaxi model, and it doesn’t depend on passenger count
Moravy said the new federal framework was essential for the U.S. to “maintain its position in global technological development and grow its advanced manufacturing capabilities.
He also said in a warning to the committee that outdated regulations and approval processes would “inhibit the industry’s ability to innovate,” which could potentially lead to falling behind China.
Being part of the company leading the charge in terms of autonomous vehicle development in the U.S., Moravy highlighted Tesla’s prowess through the development of the Full Self-Driving platform. Tesla vehicles with FSD engaged average 5.1 million miles before a major collision, which outpaces that of the human driver average of roughly 699,000 miles.
Moravy also highlighted the widely cited NHTSA statistic that states that roughly 94 percent of crashes stem from human error, positioning autonomous vehicles as a path to dramatically reduce fatalities and injuries.
🚨 Tesla VP of Vehicle Engineering, Lars Moravy, appeared today before the U.S. Senate Commerce Committee to discuss the importance of outlining an efficient framework for autonomous vehicles:
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) February 4, 2026
Skeptics sometimes point to cybersecurity concerns within self-driving vehicles, which was something that was highlighted during the Senate Commerce Committee hearing, but Moravy said, “No one has ever been able to take over control of our vehicles.”
This level of security is thanks to a core-embedded central layer, which is inaccessible from external connections. Additionally, Tesla utilizes a dual cryptographic signature from two separate individuals, keeping security high.
Moravy also dove into Tesla’s commitment to inclusive mobility by stating, “We are committed with our future products and Robotaxis to provide accessible transportation to everyone.” This has been a major point of optimism for AVs because it could help the disabled, physically incapable, the elderly, and the blind have consistent transportation.
Overall, Moravy’s testimony blended urgency about geopolitical competition, especially China, with concrete safety statistics and a vision of the advantages autonomy could bring for everyone, not only in the U.S., but around the world, as well.
Tesla launched a new configuration of the Model Y this week, bringing more complexity to its lineup of the vehicle and adding a new, lower entry point for those who require an All-Wheel-Drive car.
However, the broadening of the Model Y lineup in the United States could signal a somewhat uncomfortable reality for Tesla fans and car buyers, who have been vocal about their desire for a larger, full-size SUV.
Tesla has essentially moved in the opposite direction through its closure of the Model X and its continuing expansion of a vehicle that fits the bill for many, but not all.
Tesla brings closure to Model Y moniker with launch of new trim level
While CEO Elon Musk has said that there is the potential for the Model Y L, a longer wheelbase configuration of the vehicle, to enter the U.S. market late this year, it is not a guarantee.
Instead, Tesla has prioritized the need to develop vehicles and trim levels that cater to the future rollout of the Robotaxi ride-hailing service and a fully autonomous future.
But the company could be missing out on a massive opportunity, as SUVs are a widely popular body style in the U.S., especially for families, as the tighter confines of compact SUVs do not support the needs of a large family.
Although there are other companies out there that manufacture this body style, many are interested in sticking with Tesla because of the excellent self-driving platform, expansive charging infrastructure, and software performance the vehicles offer.
Additionally, the lack of variety from an aesthetic and feature standpoint has caused a bit of monotony throughout the Model Y lineup. Although Premium options are available, those three configurations only differ in terms of range and performance, at least for the most part, and the differences are not substantial.
Minor Expansions of the Model Y Fail to Address Family Needs for Space
Offering similar trim levels with slight differences to cater to each consumer’s needs is important. However, these vehicles keep a constant: cargo space and seating capacity.
Larger families need something that would compete with vehicles like the Chevrolet Tahoe, Ford Expedition, or Cadillac Escalade, and while the Model X was its largest offering, that is going away.
Tesla could fix this issue partially with the rollout of the Model Y L in the U.S., but only if it plans to continue offering various Model Y vehicles and expanding on its offerings with that car specifically. There have been hints toward a Cyber-inspired SUV in the past, but those hints do not seem to be a drastic focus of the company, given its autonomy mission.
Model Y Expansion Doesn’t Boost Performance, Value, or Space
You can throw all the different badges, powertrains, and range ratings on the same vehicle, it does not mean it’s going to sell better. The Model Y was already the best-selling vehicle in the world on several occasions. Adding more configurations seems to be milking it.
The true need of people, especially now that the Model X is going away, is going to be space. What vehicle fits the bill of a growing family, or one that has already outgrown the Model Y?
Not Expanding the Lineup with a New Vehicle Could Be a Missed Opportunity
The U.S. is the world’s largest market for three-row SUVs, yet Tesla’s focus on tweaking the existing Model Y ignores this. This could potentially result in the Osborne Effect, as sales of current models without capturing new customers who need more seating and versatility.
Expansions of the current Model Y offerings risk adding production complexity without addressing core demands, and given that the Model Y L is already being produced in China, it seems like it would be a reasonable decision to build a similar line in Texas.
Listening to consumers means introducing either the Model Y L here, or bringing a new, modern design to the lineup in the form of a full-size SUV.
Tesla confirms Full Self-Driving still isn’t garnering interest from lagging competitors
Tesla exec pleads for federal framework of autonomy to U.S. Senate Committee
