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 loses Director who designed one of the company’s best features
Thomas Dmytryk, who has spent over 11 years with Tesla and helped to develop Over-the-Air updates and the company’s vehicles’ ability to utilize them to improve, has decided to leave.
Tesla has lost the director who designed one of the company’s best features: Over-the-Air updates.
Thomas Dmytryk, who has spent over 11 years with Tesla and helped to develop Over-the-Air updates and the company’s vehicles’ ability to utilize them to improve, has decided to leave. In a lengthy statement on LinkedIn, Dmytryk said that he’s “closing the book.” He had nothing but good things to say:
“After 11 incredible years at Tesla, I’m closing the book. It’s been the ride of a lifetime: always on the news, innovating relentlessly, constantly pushing the limits. Tesla is THE place for talented, passionate people. I feel insanely lucky to have been part in that culture for so long.”
It appears the intense lifestyle of developing and creating intensively for so long might have caught up to Dmytryk, who did not give his definitive plans for the future, and it appears he may be taking some time off before jumping into a new venture:
“The future? Extremely bright. Ambitions intact, just getting started as a transformative company that could elevate billions of lives. So why leave now?! Human life’s always been my North Star, right now I need to be with mines. I’ve always admired Tesla’s top leadership and vision. But what I’ve always found incredible is the tenacity, brilliance and devotion of people on the front line. YOU make Tesla unstoppable. I wish you all the best and of course EPIC wins.”
The move was first reported by NotaTeslaApp.
Over-the-Air updates are among Tesla’s best features. They are used to improve the Full Self-Driving suite, add features, remedy recalls, and more. Many vehicles have the ability to receive OTA updates, as I did in a Ford Bronco previous to my Model Y. However, Tesla does them better than anyone else: they’re seamless, effective, and frequent. Your car always improves.
The move is a blow to Tesla, of course, considering Dmytryk’s massive contribution to the company and extremely long tenure spent, but not something that is overwhelmingly detrimental. Tesla deals with a lot of extremely intelligent people, some of whom are the best in their field, so they are sure to find a suitable replacement.
However, it’s no secret that the company has been losing some of its top talent, some of whom were in executive roles. Some have left to take on new projects, and others have not revealed their career plans.
It seems at least some of those employees are simply deciding to walk away and try new things after working so hard for so long. According to Dmytryk’s LinkedIn, he also played a large part in Musk’s acquisition of X, as he stated he “worked at Twitter/X ~45/week while working at the same pace for Tesla.”
That averages a 13-hour day, seven days a week, or 18 hours for the normal five-day work week.
News
Tesla’s most wanted Model Y heads to new region with no sign of U.S. entry
Unlike the standard Model Y, the “L” stretches the wheelbase by roughly 150 mm and the overall length by about 177 mm to 4,976 mm. The result is a genuine 2-2-2 seating layout that gives six adults proper legroom and cargo space — a true family hauler without the cramped third-row compromises of many three-row SUVs.
Tesla’s most wanted Model Y configuration is heading to a new region, and although U.S. fans and owners have requested the vehicle since its release last year, it appears the company has no plans to bring it to the market.
According to fresh regulatory filings, the six-seat Model Y L is coming to South Korea with signs indicating an imminent launch. The extended-wheelbase configuration, already a hit in China, just cleared energy-efficiency certification from the Korea Energy Agency, paving the way for deliveries as early as the first half of 2026.
The vehicle is already built at Tesla’s Giga Shanghai facility in China, making it an ideal candidate for the Asian market, as well as the European one, as the factory has been known as a bit of an export hub in the past.
$TSLA
BREAKING: The official launch of Tesla Model Y L in S.Korea seems to be quite imminent.Additional credentials related to Model YL were released today.
✅ Battery Manufacturer: LG Energy Solutions
✅ Number of passengers: 6 people
✅ Total battery capacity: 97.25 kWh… pic.twitter.com/hmy64XYi80— Tsla Chan (@Tslachan) March 6, 2026
It seems like Tesla was prepping for this release anyway, as the timing was no accident. A camouflaged Model Y L prototype was spotted testing on Korean highways the same day the certification dropped. Tesla has already secured similar approvals for Australia and New Zealand, with both markets expecting the larger Model Y in 2026.
Unlike the standard Model Y, the “L” stretches the wheelbase by roughly 150 mm and the overall length by about 177 mm to 4,976 mm. The result is a genuine 2-2-2 seating layout that gives six adults proper legroom and cargo space — a true family hauler without the cramped third-row compromises of many three-row SUVs.
South Korean filings list it as an all-wheel-drive imported electric passenger vehicle with a 97.25 kWh total battery capacity supplied by LG Energy Solution. Local tests show an impressive 543 km (337 miles) combined range at room temperature and 454 km (282 miles) in colder conditions, easing one of the biggest concerns for Korean EV buyers.
Tesla Model Y lineup expansion signals an uncomfortable reality for consumers
But for U.S. fans, things are not looking good for a launch in the market.
CEO Elon Musk has been blunt. The six-seater “wouldn’t arrive in the U.S. until late 2026, if ever,” he said, pointing to the company’s heavy bet on unsupervised Full Self-Driving and robotaxi platforms like the Cybercab. With the Model X slated for discontinuation, many families hoped the stretched Model Y would slide into the lineup as an affordable three-row bridge. So far, that hope remains unfulfilled.
For now, South Korean drivers will be among the first buyers outside China to enjoy the spacious, efficient Model Y L. Tesla continues its global rollout strategy, tailoring vehicles to regional tastes while North American customers keep refreshing their apps and crossing their fingers.
The Model Y L proves the appetite for practical, family-sized electric SUVs is stronger than ever. Hopefully, Tesla will listen to its fans and bring the vehicle to the U.S. where it would likely sell well.
Elon Musk
Tesla is ramping up its advertising strategy on social media
Tesla has long stood out in the automotive world for its unconventional approach to advertising—or, more accurately, its near-total avoidance of it. For over a decade, the company spent virtually nothing on traditional marketing.
Tesla seems to be ramping up its advertising strategy on social media once again. Marketing and advertising have not been a major focus of Tesla’s, something that has brought some criticism to the company from its fans.
However, the company looks to be making adjustments to that narrative, as it has at times in the past, as ads were spotted on several different platforms over the past few days.
On Facebook and YouTube, ads were spotted that were evidently placed by Tesla. On Facebook, Tesla was advertising Full Self-Driving, and on YouTube, an ad for its Energy Division was spotted:
Tesla also threw up some ads on YouTube for Energy https://t.co/19DGQMjBsA pic.twitter.com/XQRfgaDKxY
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) March 9, 2026
Tesla has long stood out in the automotive world for its unconventional approach to advertising—or, more accurately, its near-total avoidance of it. For over a decade, the company spent virtually nothing on traditional marketing.
In 2022, Tesla’s U.S. ad spend was roughly $152,000, a rounding error compared to General Motors’ $3.6 billion the following year.
Traditional automakers averaged about $495 per vehicle on ads; Tesla spent $0. CEOElon Musk’s stance was explicit: “Tesla does not advertise or pay for endorsements,” he posted on X in 2019. “Instead, we use that money to make the product great.”
The strategy relied on word-of-mouth from delighted owners, Elon’s massive X following, viral product launches, media frenzy, and customer referrals. A great product, Musk argued, sells itself. It does not need Super Bowl spots or billboards. Resources poured into R&D instead, with Tesla investing nearly $3,000 per car, far more than rivals.
Tesla counters jab at lack of advertising with perfect response
This reluctance wasn’t arrogance; it was philosophy, and Musk made it clear that the money was better spent on the product. Heavy spending on ads was seen as wasteful when innovation and authenticity drove organic demand. Shareholder calls for marketing budgets were ignored.
The current shift, paid Facebook ads promoting Full Self-Driving (Supervised) and YouTube Shorts offering up to $1,000 back on Powerwall batteries, marks a pragmatic evolution.
These targeted campaigns coincide with the end of one-time FSD purchases and a March 31 deadline for FSD transfer eligibility on new vehicles.
This move likely signals Tesla adapting to scale, as well as a more concerted effort to stop misinformation regarding its platform. As EV competition intensifies and the company bets big on robotaxis and energy storage, pure organic buzz may not suffice to hit adoption targets. Selective digital ads allow precise, cost-effective reach without abandoning core principles.
If successful, it could foreshadow measured expansion into marketing, boosting high-margin software and home energy revenue while preserving Tesla’s innovative edge. But, it’s nice to see the strategy return, especially as Tesla has been reluctant to change its mind in the past.
Tesla loses Director who designed one of the company’s best features
Tesla’s most wanted Model Y heads to new region with no sign of U.S. entry
