Connect with us

News

NASA asks SpaceX to decide the fate of ‘Dragon XL’ lunar cargo spacecraft

Published

on

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.

Advertisement

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.”

The Gateway’s first two modules are tentatively working towards a launch on a SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket no earlier than late 2024. (NASA)

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.

SpaceX’s Starship Moon lander design as of 2021.

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.

Advertisement

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.

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

Elon Musk

Tesla Q1 Earnings: What Elon Musk and Co. will answer during the call

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA) is set to hold its Earnings Call for the first quarter of 2026 on Wednesday, and there are a lot of interesting things that are swirling around in terms of speculation from investors.

With the company’s executives, including CEO Elon Musk, answering a handful of questions that investors submit through the Say platform, fans want to know a lot of things about a lot of things.

These five questions come from Retail Investors, who are normal, everyday shareholders:

  1. When will we have the Optimus v3 reveal? When will Optimus production start, since we ended the Model S and Model X production earlier than mid-year? What’s the expected Optimus production rate exiting this year? What are the initial targeted skills?
  2. What milestones are you targeting for unsupervised FSD and Robotaxi expansion beyond Austin this year, and how will that drive recurring revenue?
  3. How will Hardware 3 cars reach Unsupervised Full Self-Driving?
  4. When do you expect Unsupervised Full Self-Driving to reach customer cars?
  5. When will Robotaxi expand past its current limited rollout?

Additionally, these are currently the three questions that are slated to be answered by Institutional Firms, which also answer a handful of questions during the call:

  1. Now that FSD has been approved in the Netherlands and is expected to launch across Europe this summer, can you discuss your Robotaxi strategy for the region?
  2. What enabled you to finish the AI5 tapeout early and were there any changes to the original vision? Last week, Elon said AI5 will go into Optimus and the Supercomputer, but one month ago said it would go into the Robotaxi. Has AI5 been dropped from the vehicle roadmap?
  3. Given the recent NHTSA incident filings, can you update us on the Robotaxi safety data? If safety validation remains the primary bottleneck, why not deploy thousands of vehicles to accelerate the removal of the safety driver?

The questions range through every current Tesla project, including FSD expansion and Optimus. However, many of the answers we will get will likely be repetitive answers we’ve heard in the past.

This is especially pertinent when the questions about when Unsupervised FSD will reach customer cars: we know Musk will say that it will happen this year. Is Tesla capable of that? Maybe. But a more transparent answer that is more revealing of a true timeline would be appreciated.

Hardware 3 owners are anxiously awaiting the arrival of FSD v14 Lite, which was promised to them last year for a release sometime this year.

The Earnings Call is set to take place on Wednesday at market close.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Elon Musk reveals shocking Tesla Optimus patent detail

What looked promising on paper and in simulations failed to deliver the reliability required for a robot expected to handle delicate tasks like folding laundry, assembling electronics, or assisting in factories and homes.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Elon Musk revealed a shocking detail on the Tesla Optimus patent that was revealed last week. Despite it being made public for the first time, Musk said the company has already moved on from the design, an incredible truth about the development of new technology: things move fast.

Musk dropped a bombshell about the Tesla Optimus humanoid robot hand patent that was released last week. Musk, candidly replying to a post late at night on X, revealed that what is a new technology to many fans and insiders is actually old news to those developing the tech directly.

“We already changed the design,” Musk said. “This one didn’t actually work.”

Patents, after all, are often viewed as blueprints for future products. Yet Musk revealed that the rolling contact mechanism—intended to provide smooth, low-friction articulation in the fingers—had already been scrapped after real-world testing exposed its shortcomings.

What looked promising on paper and in simulations failed to deliver the reliability required for a robot expected to handle delicate tasks like folding laundry, assembling electronics, or assisting in factories and homes.

The hand has been one of the biggest challenges for Tesla engineers since Optimus development started years ago. Musk has said that there is not enough recognition for how incredible and useful the human hand is, and designing one for a humanoid robot has been the biggest challenge of all.

Tesla is stumped on how to engineer this Optimus part, but they’re close

This moment underscores the persistent engineering hurdles in achieving reliable humanoid hand dexterity. Human fingers are marvels of evolution: 27 bones, intricate tendons, ligaments, and a network of sensors working in perfect harmony. Replicating that in metal and silicon is extraordinarily difficult.

Rolling contacts promised reduced wear and precise motion, but testing likely revealed issues with durability under repeated stress, grip stability on varied surfaces, or the micro-precision needed for fine motor skills.

These aren’t minor tweaks, but instead they represent fundamental challenges that have plagued robotics teams for decades. Even advanced competitors struggle here—hands remain the Achilles’ heel of most humanoids because the margin for error is razor-thin.

A fraction of a millimeter off, and a robot drops a glass or fails to button a shirt.

What makes Musk’s reply remarkable is how it signals Tesla’s direct communication style on prototype limitations. While many companies guard failures behind glossy marketing and vague timelines, Tesla openly shares setbacks.

Musk was forthcoming about the failure of this recent design. This transparency builds trust with investors, engineers, and fans. It shows Tesla treats Optimus development like true science: rapid iteration, rigorous testing, and zero tolerance for hype that doesn’t match reality.

The disclosure from Musk also highlights Tesla’s blistering pace of development. By the time the patents are published, which is often over a year after the initial filing, the technology has already evolved.

Optimus is far from a static product, and it’s a living project advancing weekly.

In the high-stakes race for general-purpose robots, Tesla’s approach stands out. Admitting a finger-joint design “didn’t actually work” isn’t a weakness—it’s confidence.

True innovation demands confronting failure head-on, and Musk just reminded the world that Optimus is being engineered that way. The next version of those hands is already in testing, and it will be better because Tesla isn’t afraid to say what didn’t work.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Tesla is sending its humanoid Optimus robot to the Boston Marathon

Tesla’s Optimus robot is heading to the Boston Marathon finish line

Published

on

By

Tesla’s Optimus humanoid robot will be stationed at the Tesla showroom at 888 Boylston Street in Boston, right along the final stretch of the Boston Marathon today, ready to cheer on runners and pose for photos with spectators.

According to a Tesla email shared by content creator Sawyer Merritt on X, Optimus will be at the Boston Boylston Street showroom on April 20, coinciding with Marathon Monday weekend. The Boston Marathon finishes on Boylston Street, and the surrounding area draws hundreds of thousands of spectators along with international broadcast coverage. Placing Optimus there puts it in front of a massive public audience at zero advertising cost.

The Tesla showroom is at 888 Boylston Street, between Gloucester Street and Fairfield Street. The final mile of the marathon runs directly along Boylston Street, with runners passing the big stores before reaching the finish line at Copley Square.

Optimus was first announced at Tesla’s AI Day event on August 19, 2021, when Elon Musk presented a vision for a general-purpose robot designed to take on dangerous, repetitive, and unwanted tasks. In March 2026, Optimus appeared at the Appliance and Electronics World Expo in Shanghai, where on-site staff stated that mass production of the robot could begin by the end of 2026. Before that, it showed up at the Tesla Hollywood Diner opening in July 2025 and at a Miami showroom event in December 2025.

Tesla’s well-calculated display of Optimus gives the public a low-pressure first encounter with a robot that Tesla is preparing  to soon deploy at scale. The company has previously indicated plans to manufacture Optimus robots at its Fremont facility at up to 1 million units annually, with an Optimus production line at Gigafactory Texas targeting 10 million units per year.

Tesla showcases Optimus humanoid robot at AWE 2026 in Shanghai

Musk has said that Optimus “has the potential to be more significant than the vehicle business over time,” and separately that roughly 80 percent of Tesla’s future value will come from the robot program. Whether that holds depends on production execution. For now, Boston gets a preview of what that future looks like, standing at the finish line on Boylston Street while 32,000 runners pass by.

Continue Reading