News
SpaceX’s response to Crew Dragon explosion unfairly maligned by head of NASA
In a bizarre turn of events, NASA administrator Jim Bridenstine has offered harsh criticism of SpaceX’s response to Crew Dragon’s April 20th explosion, suffered just prior to a static fire test of its eight Super Draco abort engines.
The problem? The NASA administrator’s criticism explicitly contradicts multiple comments made by other NASA officials, the director of the entire Commercial Crew Program, and SpaceX itself. Lest all three of the above sources were either blatant lies or deeply incorrect, it appears that Bridenstine is – intentionally or accidentally – falsely maligning SpaceX and keeping the criticism entirely focused on just one of the two Commercial Crew partners. The reality is that his initial comments were misinterpreted, but an accurate interpretation is just as unflattering.
Stay ahead of the curve and be the first to learn about new industry trends each week!
Follow along as our team gives you their take on the biggest stories of the week.Ultimately, Bridenstine responded to a tweet by Ars Technica’s Eric Berger to correct the record, noting that the criticism was directed at his belief that SpaceX’s “communication with the public was not [good]”, while the company’s post-failure communication with NASA was actually just fine. In fact, according to Commercial Crew Program (CCP) Manager Kathy Lueders, NASA team members were quite literally in the control room during the pre-static fire explosion and the failure investigation began almost instantly.
A blog post and official update published by NASA on May 28th further confirms Lueders’ praise for the immediate SpaceX/NASA response that followed the failure.
“Following the test [failure], NASA and SpaceX immediately executed mishap plans established by the agency and company. SpaceX fully cleared the test site and followed all safety protocols. Early efforts focused on making the site safe, collecting data and developing a timeline of the anomaly, which did not result in any injuries. NASA assisted with the site inspection including the operation of drones and onsite vehicles.”
— NASA, May 28th, 2019
Why, then, are Bridenstine’s comments so bizarre and unfair?
A trip down memory lane
Back in mid-2018, Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft suffered a major setback (albeit not as catastrophic as Crew Dragon’s) when a static fire test ended with a valve failing to close, leaking incredibly toxic hydrazine fuel all over the test stand and throughout the service module that was test-fired. The failure reportedly delayed Boeing’s Starliner program months as a newer service module had to replace the contaminated article that was meant to support a critical 2019 pad-abort test preceding Starliner’s first crew launch.
According to anonymous sources that have spoken with reporters like Eric Berger and NASASpaceflight.com, the anomalous test occurred in late-June 2018, followed by no less than 20-30 days of complete silence from both Boeing and NASA. If Boeing told NASA, NASA certainly didn’t breathe a word of that knowledge to – in Bridenstine’s words – “the public (taxpayers)”. Prior to Mr. Berger breaking the news, Boeing ignored at least one private request for comment for several days before the author gave up and published the article, choosing to trust his source.
After the article was published, Boeing finally provided an official comment vaguely acknowledging the issue.
“We have been conducting a thorough investigation with assistance from our NASA and industry partners. We are confident we found the cause and are moving forward with corrective action. Flight safety and risk mitigation are why we conduct such rigorous testing, and anomalies are a natural part of any test program.”
— Boeing, July 21st, 2018 (T+~30 days)
SpaceX, for reference, offered an official media statement hours after Crew Dragon capsule C201 suffered a major failure during testing, acknowledging that an “anomaly” had occurred and that SpaceX and NASA were already working closely to investigate the accident. Less than two weeks after that, Vice President of Mission Assurance Hans Koenigsmann spent several minutes discussing Crew Dragon’s failure at a press conference, despite the fact that it was off topic in an event meant for a completely different mission (Cargo Dragon CRS-17).
“Earlier today, SpaceX conducted a series of engine tests on a Crew Dragon test vehicle on our test stand at Landing Zone 1 in Cape Canaveral, Florida. The initial tests completed successfully but the final test resulted in an anomaly on the test stand. Ensuring that our systems meet rigorous safety standards and detecting anomalies like this prior to flight are the main reasons why we test. Our teams are investigating and working closely with our NASA partners.”
— SpaceX, April 20th, 2019 (T+several hours)
Within ~40 days, NASA published an official update acknowledging Crew Dragon’s accident and the ongoing mishap investigation. Meanwhile, a full year after Starliner’s own major accident, NASA communications have effectively never once acknowledged it, while Boeing has been almost equally resistant to discussing or even acknowledging the problem and the delays it caused. On May 24th, NASA and Boeing announced that Starliner’s service module had passed important propulsion tests (essentially a repeat of the partially failed test in June 2018) – the anomaly that incurred months of delays and required a retest with a new service section was not mentioned once.
On April 3rd, NASA published a Commercial Crew schedule update that showed Boeing’s orbital Starliner launch debut (Orbital Flight Test, OFT) launching no earlier than August 2019, a delay of 4-5 months. In the article, NASA’s explanation (likely supplied in part by Boeing) bizarrely pointed the finger at ULA and the technicalities of Atlas V launch scheduling.
In other words, NASA somehow managed to completely leave out the fact that Starliner suffered a major failure almost a year prior that likely forced the OFT service section to be redirected to a pad abort test.
Following SpaceX’s anomaly, the company (and NASA, via Kathy Lueders) have been open about the fact that it means the Crew Dragon meant for DM-2 – the first crewed test launch – would have to be redirected to Dragon’s in-flight abort (IFA) test, while the vehicle originally meant to fly the first certified astronaut launch (USCV-1) would be reassigned to DM-2. Thankfully, this practice can be a boon for minimizing delays caused by failures. Oddly, Boeing has not once acknowledged that it was likely forced to do the same thing with Starliner, albeit with the expendable service section instead of the spacecraft’s capsule section.
Again, although the slides of additional CCP presentations from advisory committee meetings have briefly acknowledged Starliner’s failure with vague mentions like “valve design corrective action granted” (Dec. 2018) and “Service Module Hot Fire testing resuming after new valves installed” (May 2019), NASA has yet to acknowledge the Service Module failure and its multi-month schedule impact.
So, if SpaceX’s moderately quiet but otherwise excellent communication of Crew Dragon’s explosion was unsatisfactory and worthy of pointed criticism straight from the head of NASA, the fact that Boeing and NASA have scarcely acknowledged a Starliner anomaly that caused months of delays must be downright infuriating, insulting, and utterly unacceptable. And yet… not one mention during Bridenstine’s bizarre criticism of SpaceX’s supposed communication issues.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk hints at “official ceremony” with throwback photo to close Tesla Model S, Model X chapter
Elon Musk promises an official ceremony to mark the end of Tesla Model S and Model X production.
Tesla has officially begun winding down production of the Model S and Model X, sending farewell emails to U.S. customers on March 27 and updating the website to reflect the end of the line. Shoppers visiting Tesla.com now find only a limited set of Model S and Model X inventory units available for purchase, with no option to configure a new factory build. The move formalizes what CEO Elon Musk announced on the company’s Q4 2025 earnings call in January, when he said it was “time to basically bring the Model S and X programs to an end with an honorable discharge.”
Musk posted on X a throwback photo of himself speaking at the Model S production launch in 2012, and noting “We will have an official ceremony to mark the ending of an era. I love those cars.”
The mention of an official ceremony is notable. Tesla has not held a formal farewell event for a vehicle before, and Musk’s wording suggests this will be something deliberate rather than a quiet line shutdown. Given that Musk’s X post shows a photo of him on stage with a microphone in front of an audience at the Fremont factory, it wouldn’t be too far-fetched to expect a closing ceremony to take place at the same location. Perhaps? Whether it becomes a public event, a private gathering for employees, or a livestreamed moment on X remains to be seen.
Custom orders of the Tesla Model S & X have come to an end. All that’s left are some in inventory.
We will have an official ceremony to mark the ending of an era. I love those cars.
This was me at production launch 14 years ago: pic.twitter.com/6kvCf9HTHc
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) April 1, 2026
The Model S first went on sale nearly fifteen years ago and was Tesla’s first fully in-house designed vehicle, proving that an electric car could be fast, desirable, and capable of long distance on a single charge. The Model X followed in 2015, turning heads with its unmistakable and distinctive falcon-wing doors, while becoming one of the first all-electric SUVs on the market. Tesla’s two flagship vehicles would ultimately push legacy automakers to take all-electric transportation seriously and help fund development of the more affordable Model 3 and Model Y.
By 2025, however, both models had been reduced to a rounding error in Tesla’s sales figures. Musk was direct about what comes next, stating “We are going to convert that production space to an Optimus factory. It’s part of our overall shift to an autonomous future.”
Elon Musk’s $10 Trillion robot: Inside Tesla’s push to mass produce Optimus
That shift is already underway. Tesla officially started Optimus Gen 3 production at its Fremont factory in January 2026, with the line targeting a run rate of one million units per year. The Gen 3 robot features 22 degrees of freedom per hand, runs on Tesla’s AI5 chip, and shares the same neural network architecture as Full Self-Driving. A dedicated Optimus factory at Gigafactory Texas is also under construction, with a planned annual capacity of 10 million units. The production lines that once built the Model S and Model X are being converted to support that ramp.
Tesla confirmed it will continue to support existing owners with service, software updates, and parts for as long as people own the vehicles. For buyers still interested in a new example, remaining U.S. inventory is discounted and the window is closing fast.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk announces disappointing Tesla Optimus update
In a post on X on March 31, Musk stated that Optimus 3 is mobile but requires some finishing touches before it is ready to be shown to the world. This update comes on the final day of the first quarter, a period when Tesla had previously signaled expectations for a Gen 3 reveal.
Elon Musk announced a disappointing update to the unveiling of Tesla Optimus and its third-generation iteration, missing a timeline it aimed to hit in the first quarter of the year.
Musk has confirmed that the highly anticipated Optimus Gen 3 humanoid robot is already walking around and operational, yet the public unveiling will face a short delay as the company applies final refinements.
In a post on X on March 31, Musk stated that Optimus 3 is mobile but requires some finishing touches before it is ready to be shown to the world. This update comes on the final day of the first quarter, a period when Tesla had previously signaled expectations for a Gen 3 reveal.
Optimus 3 is walking around, but needs some finishing touches before it’s ready to be shown
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) March 31, 2026
The announcement follows reports of Optimus Gen 3 appearing at the Tesla Diner in Los Angeles, where it was observed serving and moving about until sunset. Images and videos shared by observers captured the robot in action, highlighting its progress in real-world mobility.
Tesla had aimed to showcase the production intent version of Optimus Gen 3 during the first quarter of 2026, positioning it as a major step toward factory deployment and eventual commercial availability. Musk has described the robot as featuring advanced capabilities, including highly dexterous hands with significant degrees of freedom, powered by Tesla’s AI systems for complex tasks.
This minor postponement aligns with Tesla’s iterative approach to development. Earlier statements from Musk indicated that Gen 3 would represent the most advanced humanoid robot yet, designed primarily for internal factory use before scaling to external customers.
Elon Musk’s $10 Trillion robot: Inside Tesla’s push to mass produce Optimus
Production timelines point toward low-volume output starting in the summer of 2026, with volume ramp-up targeted for 2027. The delay underscores the company’s commitment to quality over speed, ensuring the robot meets rigorous standards for safety and performance in practical environments.
Optimus represents a cornerstone of Tesla’s long-term vision beyond electric vehicles. Musk has repeatedly emphasized that successful humanoid robotics could transform industries by addressing labor shortages and enabling new forms of productivity.
Competitors in the space continue to advance their own platforms, yet Tesla’s vertical integration, from custom actuators to end-to-end AI training, positions Optimus as a potential leader. Community reactions on social media range from excitement over visible progress to impatience with shifting timelines, a familiar pattern in Tesla’s innovation journey.
Investors and enthusiasts view Optimus as critical to Tesla’s valuation, potentially surpassing its automotive business in scale. With the robot already demonstrating walking and basic interactions, the finishing touches likely involve software polishing, hardware fine-tuning, and reliability enhancements.
Musk’s update suggests the reveal could arrive in the coming weeks or months, maintaining momentum toward broader deployment.
As Tesla pushes the boundaries of physical artificial intelligence, this latest development keeps Optimus in the spotlight. The company continues to prioritize rapid iteration while delivering on its promises to shareholders and customers. The robotics revolution at Tesla appears closer than ever, promising profound impacts on manufacturing, services, and daily life in the years ahead.
Elon Musk
Countdown: America is going back to the Moon and SpaceX holds the key to what comes after
NASA’s Artemis II launches Wednesday, sending humans near the Moon for the first time since 1972.
For the first time since Apollo 17 touched down on the lunar surface in December 1972, the United States is sending humans back toward the Moon. NASA’s Artemis II mission is set to launch as early as this week from Kennedy Space Center in Florida, carrying four astronauts on a 10-day journey around the Moon and back to Earth. It will not land anyone on the surface this time, but it is the first crewed flight in over half a century to travel beyond low Earth orbit, and it sets the stage for Elon Musk’s SpaceX missions to follow.
The mission uses NASA’s Space Launch System rocket and the Orion spacecraft, which will fly around the Moon before splashing down in the Pacific Ocean around April 10. For context, an uncrewed Artemis I flew the same path in 2022, proving the hardware worked. Artemis II now tests it with people aboard.
According to NASA’s official countdown blog, launch preparations are on track with an 80 percent chance of favorable weather. “Hey, let’s go to the moon!” Commander Wiseman told reporters upon arriving at Kennedy Space Center.
Source: NASA
Beyond Artemis II lies the lander question, and that is where SpaceX enters directly. In 2021, NASA awarded SpaceX a $2.89 billion contract to develop the Starship Human Landing System, a modified version of Starship designed to ferry astronauts from lunar orbit to the surface. The original plan called for SpaceX to deliver that lander for Artemis III, which was to be the first crewed lunar landing. Timing for Starship development, however, caused NASA to restructure the mission sequence entirely.
Before SpaceX’s Starship Human Landing System (HLS) can put anyone on the Moon, it has to solve a problem no rocket has demonstrated at scale, which is refueling in orbit. Because the Starship HLS requires approximately ten tanker launches worth of propellant loaded into a depot in low Earth orbit before it has enough fuel to reach the lunar surface, SpaceX plans to conduct this refueling process using its upgraded V3 Starship. And until that demonstration flies and succeeds, the Starship moon lander remains a question mark.
SpaceX’s Starship V3 is almost ready and it will change space travel forever
In February 2026, NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman confirmed that Artemis III, now planned for mid-2027, and will instead test lunar landers in low Earth orbit, with the actual landing pushed to Artemis IV that’s targeted for 2028.
Musk responded to earlier criticism of SpaceX’s schedule by posting on X that his company is “moving like lightning compared to the rest of the space industry,” and added that “Starship will end up doing the whole Moon mission.” The contract competition was also reopened in October 2025 by then NASA chief Sean Duffy, who cited Starship’s delays and said the agency needed speed given China’s own stated goal of landing astronauts on the Moon by 2030.
They won’t. SpaceX is moving like lightning compared to the rest of the space industry.
Moreover, Starship will end up doing the whole Moon mission. Mark my words.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) October 20, 2025
Artemis came from the first Trump administration’s 2017 Space Policy Directive 1, which directed NASA to return humans to the Moon. The program picked up pace through the 2020s, with the Orion spacecraft and SLS taking years to develop at enormous costs. SpaceX entered the picture in 2021 as the chosen lander contractor, tying the commercial space sector into what had historically been an all government undertaking.
Whether SpaceX’s Starship ultimately carries astronauts to the lunar surface or shares that role with Blue Origin’s competing lander, this week’s Artemis II launch is the necessary first step. Getting four humans to the Moon’s vicinity and back safely is the proof of concept everything else depends on.
Elon Musk hints at “official ceremony” with throwback photo to close Tesla Model S, Model X chapter
Elon Musk announces disappointing Tesla Optimus update
Countdown: America is going back to the Moon and SpaceX holds the key to what comes after
Elon Musk says Tesla is developing a new vehicle: ‘Way cooler than a minivan’
Elon Musk launches TERAFAB: The $25B Tesla-SpaceXAI chip factory that will rewire the AI industry
