Connect with us

News

NASA head hints that reusable rocket cos. like SpaceX will enable Moon return

Published

7 years ago

on

In a series of thoroughly unexpected and impassioned introductory remarks at one of several 2018 Advisory Council meetings, NASA administrator Jim Bridenstine bucked at least two decades of norms by all but explicitly stating that reusable rockets built by innovative private companies like SpaceX and Blue Origin will enable the true future of space exploration.

Incredibly, over the course his fascinating hour-long prelude, Bridenstine effectively mentioned NASA’s own SLS rocket and Orion spacecraft – under development for the last decade at a cost of at least several tens of billions of dollars – a total of one time each. Instead, heavily emphasizing the absolute necessity that NASA’s next major human exploration project be sustainable, the administrator spoke at length about the foundational roles that international and domestic space agencies and private companies will need to take on in order to make NASA’s on-paper return to the Moon both real, successful, and useful.

Aside from his arguably brave (but spot-on) decision to all but ignore Boeing and Northrop Grumman’s SLS rocket and Lockheed Martin’s Orion spacecraft over the course of an hour spent speaking about the future of NASA’s human exploration of the Moon and on spaceflight more generally, Bridenstine had nothing but praise for recent successes in the American aerospace industry.

Most notably, he spoke about his belief – at least partially stemming from an executive order requiring it – that the only way NASA can seriously succeed and continue to lead the world in the task of human space exploration is to put an extreme focus on sustainability. Judging from his comments on the matter, the new NASA/Federal buzzword of choice is just a different way to describe hardware reusability, although it certainly leaves wiggle room for more than simply avoiding expendable rocket hardware.

Advertisement
-->

“It’s on me to figure out how to [return to the Moon] sustainably. … And this time, when we go, we’re gonna go to stay. So how do we do go sustainably? Well, [we take] advantage of capabilities that didn’t exist in this country even five or ten years ago. We have commercial companies that can do things that weren’t possible even just a few years ago … to help develop this sustainable [Moon exploration] architecture.” – NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine, 08/29/2018

SpaceX’s BFS pictured supporting a potential lunar base. (SpaceX)

While it might not look like much (aside from a “no duh” statement) to anyone unfamiliar with the trials and tribulations of NASA bureaucracy and politicking, this quote – directed at an audience of senior NASA scientists and managers and independent experts – is absolutely extraordinary in the context of NASA’s history and the formulaic eggshells NASA administrators have traditionally been forced to walk on when discussing American rocketry.

Not only is SLS/Orion utterly and conspicuously absent in a response to the “how” of starting a new wave of lunar exploration, but Bridenstine also almost explicitly names Blue Origin and SpaceX as torchbearers of the sort of exceptional technological innovation that might revolutionize humanity’s relationship with space. By referring specifically to “commercial companies that can do things that weren’t possible even just a few years ago”, the only obvious answers in the context of serious human exploration on and around the Moon are Blue Origin and SpaceX, both of which managed their first commercial rocket landings in late 2015.

Bridenstine went even further still, noting that NASA will need not just reusable rockets for this sustainable lunar exploration, but also reusable orbital tugboats (space tugs) to sustainably ferry both humans and cargo to and from Earth and the Moon and reusable lunar landers capable of many trips back and forth from space stations orbiting the moon. At one point, he even used SpaceX CEO Elon Musk’s (in)famous and well-worn analogy of commercial airlines to emphasize the insanity of not using reusable rockets:

“We have reusable rockets [now]… Imagine if you flew here across the country to [NASA Ames] in a 737 and when the mission was over, you threw the airplane away. How many of you would have flown here?” – NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine, 08/29/2018

Reusable rockets lead the charge

It may be generous to include Blue Origin side by side with SpaceX, given the fact that its New Shepard rocket is extremely small and very suborbital, but the company does have eyes specifically set lunar landers and outposts (a project called Blue Moon) and is developing a large and reusable orbital-class rocket (New Glenn) set to debut in the early 2020s.

 

SpaceX, while focused on Mars colonization, has also expressed a willingness to participate in any sort of lunar exploration that NASA or other international space agencies might have interest in. Currently in the middle of developing its own massive and fully reusable rocket, known as the Big F_____ Rocket (BFR), SpaceX nevertheless already has a flight-tested, highly successfully, and unbeatably cost-effective family of reusable Falcon rockets capable of affordably launching significant mass to the Moon. In fact, both NASA and ESA (European Space Agency) are already seriously considering SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy as the launch vehicle of choice for several critical pieces of a Moon-orbiting space station, expected to launch no earlier than the early to mid-2020s.

Whether or not Bridenstine’s incredible and eloquent statements translate into tangible changes to NASA’s long-term strategy, it’s quite simply refreshing to hear a senior NASA executive – let alone the administrator – speak freely and rationally about the reality of what is needed to enable a truly new era of human spaceflight and exploration.

Advertisement
-->

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!

Related Topics:

Eric Ralph is Teslarati's senior spaceflight reporter and has been covering the industry in some capacity for almost half a decade, largely spurred in 2016 by a trip to Mexico to watch Elon Musk reveal SpaceX's plans for Mars in person. Aside from spreading interest and excitement about spaceflight far and wide, his primary goal is to cover humanity's ongoing efforts to expand beyond Earth to the Moon, Mars, and elsewhere.

Advertisement
Comments

Investor's Corner

Tesla price target boost from its biggest bear is 95% below its current level

Published

4 hours ago

on

January 7, 2026

By

Credit: Tesla China

Tesla stock (NASDAQ: TSLA) just got a price target boost from its biggest bear, Gordon Johnson of GLJ Research, who raised his expected trading level to one that is 95 percent lower than its current trading level.

Johnson pushed his Tesla price target from $19.05 to $25.28 on Wednesday, while maintaining the ‘Sell’ rating that has been present on the stock for a long time. GLJ has largely been recognized as the biggest skeptic of Elon Musk’s company, being particularly critical of the automotive side of things.

Tesla has routinely been called out by Johnson for negative delivery growth, what he calls “weakening demand,” and price cuts that have occurred in past years, all pointing to them as desperate measures to sell its cars.

Johnson has also said that Tesla is extremely overvalued and is too reliant on regulatory credits for profitability. Other analysts on the bullish side recognize Tesla as a company that is bigger than just its automotive side.

Many believe it is a leader in autonomous driving, like Dan Ives of Wedbush, who believes Tesla will have a widely successful 2026, especially if it can come through on its targets and schedules for Robotaxi and Cybercab.

Advertisement
-->

Justifying the price target this week, Johnson said that the revised valuation is based on “reality rather than narrative.” Tesla has been noted by other analysts and financial experts as a stock that trades on narrative, something Johnson obviously disagrees with.

Dan Nathan, a notorious skeptic of the stock, turned bullish late last year, recognizing the company’s shares trade on “technicals and sentiment.” He said, “From a trading perspective, it looks very interesting.”

Tesla bear turns bullish for two reasons as stock continues boost

Johnson has remained very consistent with this sentiment regarding Tesla and his beliefs regarding its true valuation, and has never shied away from putting his true thoughts out there.

Tesla shares closed at $431.40 today, about 95 percent above where Johnson’s new price target lies.

Advertisement
-->
Continue Reading

News

I subscribed to Tesla Full Self-Driving after four free months: here’s why

It has been incredibly valuable to me, and that is what my main factor was in considering whether to subscribe or not. It has made driving much less stressful and much more enjoyable.

Published

14 hours ago

on

January 7, 2026

By

Credit: Teslarati

I have been lucky enough to experience Tesla Full Self-Driving for the entire duration of my ownership experience for free — for four months, I have not had to pay for what I feel is the best semi-autonomous driving suite on the market.

Today, my free trial finally ran out, and I had two choices: I could go without it for a period until I felt like I absolutely needed it, or I could subscribe to it, pay $99 per month, and continue to experience the future of passenger transportation.

I chose the latter, here’s why.

Tesla Full Self-Driving Takes the Stress Out of Driving

There are a handful of driving situations that I don’t really enjoy, and I think we all have certain situations that we would just rather not encounter. This is not to say that I won’t ever experience them as someone who has driven a car for 15 years (it feels weird saying that).

I don’t love to drive in cities; I really don’t like driving on I-695 on my way to Baltimore, and I truly hate parallel parking. All three things I can do and have done, all three within the past few weeks, too.

Advertisement
-->

However, if I can avoid them, I will, and Tesla Full Self-Driving does that for me.

Tesla Full Self-Driving Eliminates the Monotony

I drive to my alma mater, Penn State University, frequently in the Winter as I am a season ticket holder to Wrestling and have been for 16 years now.

The drive to State College is over two hours and over 100 miles in total, and the vast majority of it is boring as I travel on Rt 322, which is straight, and there is a lot of nature to look at on the way.

Advertisement
-->

I am willing to let the car drive me on that ride, especially considering it is usually very low traffic, and the vast majority of it is spent on the highway.

The drive, along with several others, is simply a boring ride, where I’d much rather be looking out the windshield and windows at the mountains. I still pay attention, but having the car perform the turns and speed control makes the drive more enjoyable.

Tesla Full Self-Driving Makes Navigating Easier

Other than the local routes that I routinely travel and know like the back of my hand, I’ve really enjoyed Full Self-Driving’s ability to get me to places — specifically new ones — without me having to constantly check back at the Navigation.

Admittedly, I’ve had some qualms with the Nav, especially with some routing and the lack of ability to choose a specific route after starting a drive. For example, it takes a very interesting route to my local Supercharger, one that nobody local to my area would consider.

But there are many times I will go to a new palce and I’m not exactly sure where to go or how to get there. The Navigation, of course, helps with that. However, it is really a luxury to have my car do it for me.

Advertisement
-->

To Conclude

There was no doubt in my mind that when my Full Self-Driving trial was up, I’d be subscribing. It was really a no-brainer. I am more than aware that Full Self-Driving is far from perfect, but it is, without any doubt, the best thing about my Tesla, to me.

It has been incredibly valuable to me, and that is what my main factor was in considering whether to subscribe or not. It has made driving much less stressful and much more enjoyable.

Advertisement
-->
Continue Reading

News

Tesla Diner becomes latest target of gloom and doom narrative

Published

17 hours ago

on

January 7, 2026

By

tesla diner
Credit: Tesla

The Tesla Diner has been subject to many points of criticism since its launch in mid-2025, and skeptics and disbelievers claim the company’s latest novel concept is on its way down, but there’s a lot of evidence to state that is not the case.

The piece cites anecdotal evidence like empty parking lots, more staff than customers during a December visit, removed novelty items, like Optimus robot popcorn service and certain menu items, the departure of celebrity chef Eric Greenspan in November 2025, slow service, high prices, and a shift in recent Google/Yelp reviews toward disappointment.

The piece frames this as part of broader Tesla struggles, including sales figures and Elon Musk’s polarizing image, calling it a failed branding exercise rather than a sustainable restaurant.

This narrative is overstated and sensationalized, and is a good representation of coverage on Tesla by today’s media.

Novelty Fade is Normal, Not Failure

Any hyped launch, especially a unique Tesla-branded destination blending dining, Supercharging, and a drive-in theater, naturally sees initial crowds taper off after the “Instagram effect” wears down.

Advertisement
-->

Tesla makes major change at Supercharger Diner amid epic demand

This is common for experiential spots in Los Angeles, especially pop-up attractions or celebrity-backed venues. The article admits early success with massive lines and social media buzz, but treats the return to normal operations as “dying down.”

In reality, this stabilization is a healthy sign of transitioning from hype-driven traffic to steady patronage.

Actual Performance Metrics Contradict “Ghost Town” Claims

  • In Q4 2025, the Diner generated over $1 million in revenue, exceeding the average McDonald’s location
  • It sold over 30,000 burgers and 83,000 fries in that quarter alone. These figures indicate a strong ongoing business, especially for a single-location prototype focused on enhancing Supercharger experiences rather than competing as a mass-market chain

Advertisement
-->

Conflicting On-the-Ground Reports

While the article, and other similar pieces, describe a half-full parking lot and sparse customers during specific off-peak visits, other recent accounts push back:

  • A January 2026 X post noted 50 of 80 Supercharger stalls were busy at 11 a.m., calling it “the busiest diner in Hollywood by close to an order of magnitude

Advertisement
-->
  • Reddit discussions around the same time describe it as not empty when locals drive by regularly, with some calling the empty narrative “disingenuous anti-Tesla slop.”

Bottom Line

The Tesla Diner, admittedly, is not the nonstop circus it was at launch–that was never sustainable or intended. But, it’s far from “dying” or an “empty pit stop.”

It functions as a successful prototype: boosting Supercharger usage, generating solid revenue, and serving as a branded amenity in the high-traffic EV market of Los Angeles.

Advertisement
-->
Continue Reading