News
NASA asks SpaceX to decide the fate of ‘Dragon XL’ lunar cargo spacecraft
In a new Request For Information (RFI) quietly released by NASA on April Fools’ Day, the space agency appears to have indirectly asked SpaceX to determine the fate of its ‘Dragon XL’ lunar cargo spacecraft.
In March 2020, NASA announced that it had selected SpaceX to deliver the bulk of pressurized and unpressurized cargo it would need to crewed and operate a proposed “Gateway” lunar space station for the first several years of its existence. To accomplish that task, SpaceX would develop a heavily-modified single-use version of its Dragon 2 spacecraft with more propellant storage, more space for cargo, and a range of other design changes.
Known as Dragon XL, that spacecraft would weigh around 15 to 16 tons (~33,000-35,000 lb) at liftoff and likely require a fully or partially expendable Falcon Heavy launch for each mission to the Moon. At the time, it was a fairly balanced and reasonable choice on NASA’s part, leveraging existing investments and experience with SpaceX and Dragon and erecting no major technical hurdles. However, more than two years later, NASA still hasn’t started work on the contract.
That’s why the new April 1st RFI is so intriguing. NASA begins by referencing fine print in the original 2018 Gateway Logistics Services (GLS) Request For Proposals (RFP) that allows the agency to continue receiving and considering new proposals from new and existing providers throughout the program’s planned 17-year lifespan. The agency says its primary motivations are for “information and planning purposes, to request feedback, to promote competition,” and to “[determine] whether to conduct an on-ramp in 2022.” NASA doesn’t specify what exactly that means, but in the context of the rest of the text, it appears that the agency wants to use this RFI to help determine whether or not to finally “on-ramp” its existing Dragon XL contract with SpaceX.
However, the document gets far more interesting and suggestive. Later, NASA spells out what exactly it wants respondents to discuss. In a list of eight main questions, the agency repeatedly hints at a desire to substantially expand the scope of GLS. In question #8, NASA asks if, to help “create a vibrant supply chain in deep space,” respondents would be able to deliver additional cargo to “cislunar orbits [and] the lunar surface” or offer a “dedicated delivery tug capability” or “rapid response delivery service.”
NASA also asks for information on ways prospective GLS providers could “[minimize] the cost impact of…requirement changes,” “reduce operating costs,” and “minimize upfront costs.” In questions #2 and #3, NASA requests details about “new and/or innovative capabilities” that could “significantly increase…cargo delivery capacity” within “the next five years” and states that “offerors exceeding the minimum [cargo] capabilities may be viewed more favorably.”

NASA seems very interested in the potential benefits of alternative deep space cargo transport services that are both cheaper and more capable than Dragon XL. Between the lines, however, the RFI also reads as if it was written directly to SpaceX. The first question is perhaps the most telling: “Is your company interested in on-ramping to the GLS contract to provide Logistics Services as described in the original solicitation?”
SpaceX is the only company with an existing GLS contract that it could “on-ramp to” – a roundabout way to say “start work on”. In the following questions, NASA then repeatedly expresses interest in cargo transport capabilities well beyond the original contract’s requirements and asks about innovative new capabilities that could enable such improvements. NASA even “recognizes” and hints at a willingness to consider unorthodox solutions that, for example, might require “more than one launch” per cargo delivery or help “minimize upfront costs to the Government.” Put simply, while it does open the door for just about any US company to inform NASA about new GLS options, it’s hard not to conclude that this new RFI is at least partially designed to give SpaceX an opportunity to propose Dragon XL alternatives or upgrades.

The most obvious option: Starship. Through the Human Landing System (HLS) program, NASA has already committed to investing at least $3 billion to develop a crewed Starship Moon lander and the fully-reusable launch vehicle and refueling infrastructure required to launch and operate it. With barely any modification, the Starship architecture SpaceX and NASA are already developing could be used to deliver dozens of tons of pressurized cargo to cislunar space, lunar orbit, the Gateway, the lunar surface, or just about anywhere else NASA wants. Leveraging that significant investment would also tick almost every box in NASA’s new RFI by drastically reducing upfront and total development costs, helping to stimulate a “vibrant” deep space supply chain, and beating Dragon XL’s cargo capabilities by a factor of 5, 10, or even 20+.
Of course, there are technical challenges and reasons to believe that Starship can’t easily replace Dragon XL. Even Dragon XL risked running into Gateway’s visiting vehicle mass limit of just 14 tons. Starship would likely weigh at least 100-200 tons – more than the entire Gateway. Dragon XL would use non-cryogenic propellant and is baselined to spend at least 6-12 months at a time at the Gateway. NASA has also studied the possibility of using Dragon XL as a crew cabin or bathroom to temporarily relieve Gateway’s extremely cramped habitable volume. Starship’s main engines use cryogenic propellant that wants nothing more than to warm up and boil into gas, making it far harder to keep at the station for months at a time. Those problems are likely solvable, but it’s still worth noting that Starship is not a perfect fit right out of the box.
The RFI could also end with a whimper if SpaceX simply tells NASA that it’s happy to proceed with Dragon XL as proposed. Only time will tell. NASA is planning to hold an industry day on April 20th to better explain the RFI’s goals and wants responses by May 31st, 2022, after which the agency will decide whether or not to follow up with a solicitation or on-ramp Dragon XL.
News
Tesla’s global fleet surpasses 9 million vehicles worldwide
The update was posted by Tesla China, which competes in the world’s most competitive electric vehicle market.
Tesla’s global fleet has now exceeded 9 million vehicles, a major milestone for the electric vehicle maker.
The update was posted by Tesla China, which competes in the world’s most competitive electric vehicle market.
Tesla’s global fleet crosses 9 million vehicles
The milestone was highlighted in a graphic shared by Tesla China, which thanked the over nine million Tesla owners worldwide for their support over the years. To celebrate the milestone, Tesla China announced several incentives for select owners, from Model Y L test drives to Tesla Bot Premium Gift Sets to Supercharging perks.
The milestone comes 16 years after the company started delivering its first vehicle, the original Tesla Roadster, as observed by members of the Tesla community. The first production Roadster was delivered to Elon Musk, who was serving as chairman at the time.
Reaching a global fleet of more than 9 million vehicles reflects the cumulative impact of Tesla’s growth over the past decade, particularly following the introduction of high-volume models such as the Model 3 and Model Y. The Model 3 and Model Y have allowed Tesla to transform from a niche automaker into one of the world’s largest producers of electric cars.
Strong China sales help drive fleet growth
Tesla’s expanding global footprint has been supported by solid performance in China, where the company posted a strong finish to 2025. In December, the Model Y ranked as the country’s top-selling new energy vehicle, as per sales data compiled by Chinese auto industry aggregator Yiche.
The Model Y led China’s NEV rankings with approximately 65,874 units sold during the month, outperforming a field dominated by domestic manufacturers such as BYD, SAIC-GM-Wuling, and Xiaomi. Tesla’s Model 3 also delivered an impressive result, ranking eighth overall with just under 28,000 units sold, ahead of numerous locally produced competitors despite its premium pricing.
Tesla China’s broader performance in December was equally notable. The company sold 97,171 vehicles wholesale during the month, based on data from the China Passenger Car Association. The result marked Tesla China’s second-highest monthly total on record, trailing only November 2022’s peak of 100,291 units.
News
Tesla launches new affordable Model Y configuration in the U.S.
Tesla has launched another new affordable Model Y configuration in the United States, now adding a fifth version of the all-electric crossover to its lineup, diversifying the car’s options and giving consumers more choices at the time of purchase.
Tesla launched the Model Y All-Wheel-Drive on Monday night, pricing it at $41,990. It features 294 miles of range, a 125 MPH top speed, and a 0-60 MPH acceleration rate of 4.6 seconds.
The vehicle is the second most-affordable configuration of the Model Y, only eclipsing the Model Y Rear-Wheel-Drive, which is priced at $39,990.
The move to expand the Model Y lineup comes just a week after CEO Elon Musk confirmed the company would remove the Model S and Model X from production, making way for manufacturing of the Optimus robot at the company’s Fremont, California, factory.
🚨 Tesla has just launched the Model Y All-Wheel-Drive, a new configuration, in the U.S. for $41,990
It has 294 miles of range, a 4.6s 0-60 MPH acceleration rate, and a 125 MPH top speed pic.twitter.com/cyd81m26vB
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) February 3, 2026
The Model Y All-Wheel-Drive fits the bill of the “Standard” offerings of the vehicle that Tesla launched last year. It is void of many of the more luxurious features, which are available in the “Premium” trim levels, available in Rear-Wheel-Drive, All-Wheel-Drive, and Performance.
The differences between the Standard and Premium configurations can be found in the video below:
@teslarati There are some BIG differences between the Tesla Model Y Standard and Tesla Model Y Premium #tesla #teslamodely ♬ Sia – Xeptemper
With five configurations now available in the Model Y, it certainly seems as if Tesla is attempting to get the vehicle available in more options than ever before.
With the Model S and Model X being removed from production due to their irrelevance to the future and Tesla’s focus on autonomy, diversifying the Model Y portfolio seems to align with the idea that the company is okay with making more variations of its most popular car.
Tesla Model Y Standard: first impressions from a Premium owner
Removing the Model S and Model X and replacing them with a new Model Y configuration is not exactly what fans have been wanting; many have been wondering what Tesla will do to replace the need for a bigger SUV for large families.
Nevertheless, Tesla’s relentless attitude toward solving autonomy and its preparation to launch a self-driving ride-hailing service seem to fit the bill for this move. Soon, it will be the Model 3, Model Y, and Cybercab playing the main parts of this autonomous future. The Cybertruck will be sticking around for other things, like local hauling.
Elon Musk
SpaceX officially acquires xAI, merging rockets with AI expertise
SpaceX has officially acquired xAI, merging rockets with AI expertise in what is the first move to bring Elon Musk’s companies under one umbrella.
On February 2, SpaceX officially announced the acquisition of xAI, uniting two powerhouse companies under a single entity, creating what the space exploration company called in a blog post “one of the most ambitious, vertically integrated innovation engines on (and off) Earth.”
🚨 BREAKING: Elon Musk has posted a new blog on SpaceX’s website confirming the acquisition of xAI pic.twitter.com/TFgeHGMpXc
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) February 2, 2026
The deal will integrate xAI’s advanced AI capabilities, including the Grok chatbot and massive training infrastructure, with SpaceX’s rocket technology, Starlink satellite network, and ambitious space exploration goals.
The acquisition comes at a pivotal moment: xAI is valued at around $230 billion as of late 2025, and has been racing to scale AI compute amid global competition from companies like OpenAI, Google, and Meta. Meanwhile, SpaceX, which was recently valued at $800 billion, is facing escalating costs for its multiplanetary ambitions.
By combining forces, the merged entity gains a unified approach to tackle one of AI’s biggest bottlenecks: the enormous energy and infrastructure demands of next-gen models.
Musk wrote in a blog post on SpaceX’s website that:
“In the long term, space-based AI is obviously the only way to scale. To harness even a millionth of our Sun’s energy would require over a million times more energy than our civilization currently uses! The only logical solution therefore is to transport these resource-intensive efforts to a location with vast power and space. I mean, space is called “space” for a reason.”
Musk details the need for orbital data centers, stating that his estimate is that “within 2 to 3 years, the lowest cost way to generate AI compute will be in space.
This cost-efficiency alone will enable innovative companies to forge ahead in training their AI models and processing data at unprecedented speeds and scales, accelerating breakthroughs in our understanding of physics and invention of technologies to benefit humanity.”
SpaceX recently filed for approval from the FCC to launch up to one million solar-powered satellites configured as high-bandwidth, optically linked compute platforms.
These facilities would harness near-constant sunlight with minimal maintenance, delivering what the company projects as transformative efficiency.
Musk has long argued that space offers the ultimate solution for power-hungry AI projects. But that’s not all the merger will take care of.
Additionally, it positions the company to fund broader goals. Revenue from the Starlink expansion, potential SpaceX IPO, and AI-driven applications could accelerate the development of lunar bases, as Musk believes multiplanetary life will be crucial to saving civilization.
Critics question the feasibility of massive constellations amid orbital debris concerns and regulatory hurdles. Yet, proponents see it as a bold step toward a multiplanetary computing infrastructure that extends human civilization beyond Earth.