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 (TSLA) receives “Buy” rating and $551 PT from Canaccord Genuity
He also maintained a “Buy” rating for TSLA stock over the company’s improving long-term outlook, which is driven by autonomy and robotics.
Canaccord Genuity analyst George Gianarikas raised his Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) price target from $482 to $551. He also maintained a “Buy” rating for TSLA stock over the company’s improving long-term outlook, which is driven by autonomy and robotics.
The analyst’s updated note
Gianarikas lowered his 4Q25 delivery estimates but pointed to several positive factors in the Tesla story. He noted that EV adoption in emerging markets is gaining pace, and progress in FSD and the Robotaxi rollout in 2026 represent major upside drivers. Further progress in the Optimus program next year could also add more momentum for the electric vehicle maker.
“Overall, yes, 4Q25 delivery expectations are being revised lower. However, the reset in the US EV market is laying the groundwork for a more durable and attractive long-term demand environment.
“At the same time, EV penetration in emerging markets is accelerating, reinforcing Tesla’s potential multi‑year growth runway beyond the US. Global progress in FSD and the anticipated rollout of a larger robotaxi fleet in 2026 are increasingly important components of the Tesla equity story and could provide sentiment tailwinds,” the analyst wrote.
Tesla’s busy 2026
The upcoming year would be a busy one for Tesla, considering the company’s plans and targets. The autonomous two-seat Cybercab has been confirmed to start production sometime in Q2 2026, as per Elon Musk during the 2025 Annual Shareholder Meeting.
Apart from this, Tesla is also expected to unveil the next-generation Roadster on April 1, 2026. Tesla is also expected to start high-volume production of the Tesla Semi in Nevada next year.
Apart from vehicle launches, Tesla has expressed its intentions to significantly ramp the rollout of FSD to several regions worldwide, such as Europe. Plans are also underway to launch more Robotaxi networks in several more key areas across the United States.
News
Waymo sues Santa Monica over order to halt overnight charging sessions
In its complaint, Waymo argued that its self-driving cars’ operations do not constitute a public nuisance, and compliance with the city’s order would cause the company irreparable harm.
Waymo has filed a lawsuit against the City of Santa Monica in Los Angeles County Superior Court, seeking to block an order that requires the company to cease overnight charging at two facilities.
In its complaint, Waymo argued that its self-driving cars’ operations do not constitute a public nuisance, and compliance with the city’s order would cause the company irreparable harm.
Nuisance claims
As noted in a report from the Los Angeles Times, Waymo’s two charging sites at Euclid Street and Broadway have operated for about a year, supporting the company’s growing fleet with round-the-clock activity. Unfortunately, this has also resulted in residents in the area reportedly being unable to sleep due to incessant beeping from self-driving taxis that are moving in and out of the charging stations around the clock.
Frustrated residents have protested against the Waymos by blocking the vehicles’ paths, placing cones, and “stacking” cars to create backups. This has also resulted in multiple calls to the police.
Last month, the city issued an order to Waymo and its charging partner, Voltera, to cease overnight operations at the charging locations, stating that the self-driving vehicles’ activities at night were a public nuisance. A December 15 meeting yielded no agreement on mitigations like software rerouting. Waymo proposed changes, but the city reportedly insisted that nothing would satisfy the irate residents.
“We are disappointed that the City has chosen an adversarial path over a collaborative one. The City’s position has been to insist that no actions taken or proposed by Waymo would satisfy the complaining neighbors and therefore must be deemed insufficient,” a Waymo spokesperson stated.
Waymo pushes back
In its legal complaint, Waymo stated that its “activities at the Broadway Facilities do not constitute a public nuisance.” The company also noted that it “faces imminent and irreparable harm to its operations, employees, and customers” from the city’s order. The suit also stated that the city was fully aware that the Voltera charging sites would be operating around the clock to support Waymo’s self-driving taxis.
The company highlighted over one million trips in Santa Monica since launch, with more than 50,000 rides starting or ending there in November alone. Waymo also criticized the city for adopting a contentious strategy against businesses.
“The City of Santa Monica’s recent actions are inconsistent with its stated goal of attracting investment. At a time when the City faces a serious fiscal crisis, officials are choosing to obstruct properly permitted investment rather than fostering a ‘ready for business’ environment,” Waymo stated.
News
Tesla FSD v14.2.2 is getting rave reviews from drivers
So far, early testers have reported buttery-smooth drives with confident performance, even at night or on twisty roads.
Tesla Full Self-Driving (Supervised) v14.2.2 is receiving positive reviews from owners, with several drivers praising the build’s lack of hesitation during lane changes and its smoother decision-making, among others.
The update, which started rolling out on Monday, also adds features like dynamic arrival pin adjustment. So far, early testers have reported buttery-smooth drives with confident performance, even at night or on twisty roads.
Owners highlight major improvements
Longtime Tesla owner and FSD user @BLKMDL3 shared a detailed 10-hour impression of FSD v14.2.2, noting that the system exhibited “zero lane change hesitation” and “extremely refined” lane choices. He praised Mad Max mode’s performance, stellar parking in locations including ticket dispensers, and impressive canyon runs even in dark conditions.
Fellow FSD user Dan Burkland reported an hour of FSD v14.2.2’s nighttime driving with “zero hesitations” and “buttery smooth” confidence reminiscent of Robotaxi rides in areas such as Austin, Texas. Veteran FSD user Whole Mars Catalog also demonstrated voice navigation via Grok, while Tesla owner Devin Olsen completed a nearly two-hour drive with FSD v14.2.2 in heavy traffic and rain with strong performance.
Closer to unsupervised
FSD has been receiving rave reviews, even from Tesla’s competitors. Xpeng CEO He Xiaopeng, for one, offered fresh praise for FSD v14.2 after visiting Silicon Valley. Following extended test drives of Tesla vehicles running the latest FSD software, He stated that the system has made major strides, reinforcing his view that Tesla’s approach to autonomy is indeed the proper path towards autonomy.
According to He, Tesla’s FSD has evolved from a smooth Level 2 advanced driver assistance system into what he described as a “near-Level 4” experience in terms of capabilities. While acknowledging that areas of improvement are still present, the Xpeng CEO stated that FSD’s current iteration significantly surpasses last year’s capabilities. He also reiterated his belief that Tesla’s strategy of using the same autonomous software and hardware architecture across private vehicles and robotaxis is the right long-term approach, as it would allow users to bypass intermediate autonomy stages and move closer to Level 4 functionality.
Tesla (TSLA) receives “Buy” rating and $551 PT from Canaccord Genuity
Waymo sues Santa Monica over order to halt overnight charging sessions
