

SpaceX
SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy could launch astronauts to the Moon, says NASA admin
Despite contrary comments made one week prior, NASA administrator Jim Bridenstine has affirmed – this time in no uncertain terms – that a two-week study investigating commercial options for launching the Orion spacecraft to the Moon has concluded that Falcon Heavy could be the only practical option if NASA chooses to proceed.
Due to fundamental performance and logistical constraints of both Delta IV Heavy and Falcon Heavy, as well as a lack in confidence in certain alternative paths, NASA now believes that a commercial option – Falcon Heavy – exists, but would face multiple major challenges, to the extent that Bridenstine indicated it would not be able to make the 2020 launch deadline with an unspecified budget. However, unlike his March 27th statements to Congress, he told the NASA stakeholder audience that the complex Falcon Heavy configuration “could be used in the future if [NASA can] get through all of [the challenges].” Reading between the lines, Administrator Bridenstine has effectively put the expensive and delay-ridden SLS rocket on notice if its contractors – primarily Boeing – fail to rise to the challenge and accelerate the rocket’s launch debut.
The April 1st comments – made before an audience of major NASA center leaders – are in stark contrast to dozens of comments made by Bridenstine in response to members of Congress on March 27th, in which he repeatedly went to bat for SLS launching Orion on EM-1 while scarcely mentioning commercial alternatives.
Despite the apparent incoherence of Administrator Bridenstine’s continuing comments, the sad – but also promising –
Sitting before the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation committee on March 13th, he announced the commercial Orion launch study as a token of recognition that NASA needs to get better at staying on-schedule and on-budget for US taxpayers and Congressional purse string-holders. After the US Vice President challenged NASA to return humans to the Moon with any means necessary by 2024, Bridenstine affirmed that NASA would do everything in its power to meet that charge, including the exploitation of commercial alternatives. In a March 27th hearing before members of Congress with explicit stakes in the SLS rocket’s pork, he barely mentioned commercial alternatives for Orion EM-1, instead focusing on a paired study aiming to accelerate the SLS launch debut schedule while also reiterating his confidence that Boeing and other contractors can rise to the occasion.
In his latest April 1st comments on commercial launch alternatives for Orion’s Moon mission debut, Bridenstine spoke to nearly all of NASA’s major center, program, and directive managers and stuck to the technical facts of the matters at hand. He repeatedly acknowledged that both launching an uncrewed Orion spacecraft to the Moon before the end of 2020 and returning astronauts to its surface by the end of 2024 would be extraordinary challenges and could require far-reaching changes and reforms throughout NASA. He also reaffirmed his intent to ensure that nothing be taken off the table as an option to accomplish those ambitious goals. This included an indication that (in more polite terms, of course) the
We see, in history, that in the past we have had an agenda to get to the Moon and then the resources don’t materialize and it gets canceled, and then we have another agenda to go to the Moon and the resources don’t materialize and it gets canceled. From my perspective, it is my objective to get the resources necessary to accomplish [this goal]. It is also my commitment to make sure that people understand the history here and that we can have a great, ambitious goal, but without the resources, it won’t be accomplished.
NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine, 04/01/2019


“A whole host of challenges”
The specifics of what the NASA administrator briefly hinted at for a Falcon Heavy launch of EM-1 are spectacular enough to warrant additional discussion. According to Bridenstine, the two-week study NASA conducted essentially concluded that ULA’s Delta IV Heavy rocket was not a practical option for several major reasons. First, it seems that NASA has little to no confidence that Lockheed Martin and its contractors would be able to retrofit EM-1’s Orion and European Service Module (ESM) with the hardware and software needed for on-orbit rendezvous with a boost stage in time for a 2020 launch. Those capabilities were not planned for Orion until EM-3, NET 2024 in an absolute best-case scenario. This would entirely preclude a distributed launch solution, regardless of whether Delta IV Heavy is capable of placing the payloads in orbit.
Even if a rendezvous was on the table, a distributed launch scenario would still be impossible with either two Falcon Heavies or Delta IV Heavies, as both launches would have to occur as close to simultaneously as possible – optimally just a few hours apart. SpaceX has only one pad capable of supporting Falcon Heavy, while ULA’s Delta IV Heavy has two pads, but only one that can launch to the required orbit. A bigger problem: Delta IV Heavy is capable of launching no more than ~28,400 kg (63,000 lb) to an altitude of ~200 km (120 mi), which definitely rules out a Delta IV Heavy launch of the ICPS upper stage (~30,000 kg, 66,000 lb) and could also fall short for Orion/ESM (~26,000 kg, 57,000 lb), assuming that both would need to be launched to an elliptical orbit of 1800 km (1150 mi).
Reddit /u/DoYouWonda actually visualized this potential (but highly improbable) scenario and published a brief abstract analyzing the possibility on March 15th. (Reddit /u/DoYouWonda, minor edits by Teslarati)
Due to NASA’s implied assumption that on-orbit rendezvous of Orion and a booster stage is out of the question and the potential performance shortcomings of Delta IV Heavy, as well as Falcon Heavy’s inability to launch Orion/ESM towards lunar orbit, only one option apparently remains. According to Bridenstine, NASA concluded that a mission profile in which Falcon Heavy places Orion, a service module, and an ICPS upper stage in orbit in a single launch may actually be a serious option – and the only option – for a near-term commercial alternative for Orion’s first operational test flight. The unofficial graphic above offers a rough glimpse of what that massive payload might look like atop Falcon Heavy.
[Finally], there is another solution out there: a Falcon Heavy with an ICPS at the top – talk about strange bedfellows – and an ESM and Orion crew capsule. That ultimately has the ability to potentially – gosh, [NASA Associate Administrator Bill] Gerst is gonna be so mad at me for saying all of this… by the way, none of this was cleared by Gerstenmaier, he’s still the best rocket scientist we have [camera pans to Gerst, laughter], no insult to anyone else in the room – so, at the end of the day, there is a solution here that could potentially work for the future.
It would require time, it would require cost, and there is risk involved, but guess what? If we’re gonna land boots on the Moon in 2024, we have time, and we have the ability to accept some risk and make some modifications. All of that is on the table. There is nothing sacred here that is off the table, and [FH+ICPS+Orion/ESM] is a potential capability that could help us land on the Moon in 2024.
NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine, 04/01/2019
Combined, the Orion spacecraft, its ESM, and a fueled ICPS boost stage would weigh no less than 56,000 kg (~123,000 lb) at launch, relative to Falcon Heavy’s reported expendable performance of about 64,000 kg (140,000 lb) to Low Earth Orbit (LEO). In other words, it’s possible that Falcon Heavy could effectively do the exact same job as SLS would need to do to perform a nominal Orion EM-1 orbital insertion. However, a huge number of challenges remain for such an exotic Falcon Heavy configuration. Pad 39A would need to be outfitted with an array of systems, including a liquid hydrogen propellant plant and the ability to load Orion and its service module with hypergolic propellant while atop Falcon Heavy and vertical on the pad. To allow for vertical Orion/ESM/ICPS processing and fueling and support the massive weight and height (~95m vs. 70m) of the vehicle, the transporter-erector would need to be heavily modified. Additionally, Falcon Heavy’s aerodynamic characteristics would need to be entirely reanalyzed for such a significantly taller payload fairing.
But, as Bridenstine made clear above, those challenges would be par for the course of accomplishing something as audacious as returning humans to the Moon in less than six years. Whether or not NASA actually pursues or Congress funds such an alternative beyond the drawing board, the cat is now officially out of the bag. A potentially satisfactory replacement for SLS will now hang over the program’s head for the indefinite future, a constant threat in the (quite likely) event that the many SLS/Orion contractors fail – once again – to even loosely adhere to their budget and schedule targets. Falcon Heavy will be waiting.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk shares unbelievable Starship Flight 10 landing feat
Flight 10’s Starship upper stage demonstrated impressive accuracy when it came to its target landing zone.

SpaceX CEO Elon Musk recently shared an insane feat accomplished by Starship’s upper stage during its tenth test flight.
Despite the challenges it faced during its return trip to Earth, Flight 10’s Starship upper stage demonstrated impressive accuracy when it came to its target landing zone.
Against the odds
Musk’s update was shared on social media platform X. In a conversation about Starship upper stage’s return to Earth, Musk revealed that the upper stage splashed down just 3 meters (under 10 feet) from its intended target. Considering the size of the Starship upper stage and the ocean itself, achieving this accuracy was nothing short of insane.
Starship Flight 10 was a success as both the Super Heavy booster and Ship upper stage completed all their mission objectives. However, videos and images released by SpaceX showed the upper stage’s heat shield scorched golden-brown and parts of its aft skirt visibly missing. The flaps and other surfaces also bore signs of heavy stress from reentry.
SpaceX highlighted this in a post on X: “Starship made it through reentry with intentionally missing tiles, completed maneuvers to intentionally stress its flaps, had visible damage to its aft skirt and flaps, and still executed a flip and landing burn that placed it approximately 3 meters from its targeted splashdown point,” SpaceX noted.
A key milestone
The result stands in stark contrast to Starship’s earlier test flights this year, when all three prior upper-stage flights in 2025 ended in premature breakup before splashdown. Flight 10 not only marked the first successful splashdown of the year for the Starship upper stage, but it also delivered near-perfect precision despite its battered state, according to a Space.com report.
For SpaceX, this success is a critical proof point in developing a fully reusable launch system. A spacecraft capable of surviving severe reentry conditions and still landing within meters of its target underscores the robustness needed for future missions, including orbital payload deliveries and, eventually, landings on the Moon and Mars.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk reveals when SpaceX will perform first-ever Starship catch
“Starship catch is probably flight 13 to 15, depending on how well V3 flights go,” Musk said.

Elon Musk revealed when SpaceX would perform the first-ever catch attempt of Starship, its massive rocket that will one day take life to other planets.
On Tuesday, Starship aced its tenth test flight as SpaceX was able to complete each of its mission objectives, including a splashdown of the Super Heavy Booster in the Gulf, the deployment of eight Starlink simulators, and another splashdown of the ship in the Indian Ocean.
It was the first launch that featured a payload deployment:
SpaceX Starship Flight 10 was so successful, it’s breaking the anti-Musk narrative
SpaceX was transparent that it would not attempt to catch the Super Heavy Booster, something it has done on three previous occasions: Flight 5 on October 13, 2024, Flight 7 on January 16, and Flight 8 on March 6.
This time, it was not attempting to do so. However, there are bigger plans for the future, and Musk detailed them in a recent post on X, where he discussed SpaceX’s plans to catch Starship, which would be a monumental accomplishment.
Musk said the most likely opportunities for SpaceX to catch Starship itself would be Flight 13, Flight 14, and Flight 15, but it depends on “how well the V3 flights go.”
The Starship launched with Flight 10 was a V2, which is the same size as the subsequent V3 rocket but has a smaller payload-to-orbit rating and is less powerful in terms of initial thrust and booster thrust. Musk said there is only one more V2 rocket left to launch.
Starship catch is probably flight 13 to 15, depending on how well V3 flights go
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) August 27, 2025
V3 will be the version flown through 2026, as V4, which will be the most capable Starship build SpaceX manufactures, is likely to be the first company ship to carry humans to space.
Musk said that SpaceX planned to “hopefully” attempt a catch of Starship in 2025. However, it appears that this will likely be pushed back to 2026 due to timing.
SpaceX will take Starship catch one step further very soon, Elon Musk confirms
SpaceX would need to launch the 11th and 12th test flights by the end of the year in order to get to Musk’s expected first catch attempt of Flight 13. It’s not unheard of, but the company will need to accelerate its launch rate as it has only had three test flights this year.
Elon Musk
SpaceX Starship Flight 10 was so successful, it’s breaking the anti-Musk narrative
That’s all the proof one could need about the undeniable success of Starship Flight 10.

Starship Flight 10 was a huge success for SpaceX. When both the Super Heavy booster and the Starship Upper Stage successfully landed on their designated splashdown zones, the space community was celebrating.
The largest and most powerful rocket in the world had successfully completed its tenth test flight. And this time around, there were no rapid unscheduled disassemblies during the mission.
As per SpaceX in a statement following Flight 10, “every major objective was met, providing critical data to inform designs of the next generation Starship and Super Heavy.” The private space enterprise also stated that Flight 10 provided valuable data by stressing the limits of Starship’s capabilities.
With all of Flight 10’s mission objectives met, one would think that it would be pretty easy to cover the story of Starship’s successful tenth test flight. But that’s where one would be wrong, because Elon Musk companies, whether it be Tesla or SpaceX or xAI, tend to attract negative slant from mainstream media outlets.
This was in full force with Starship Flight 10’s coverage. Take the BBC’s Facebook post about the fight test, which read “Elon Musk’s giant rocket, earmarked for use in a 2027 mission to the Moon, has had multiple catastrophic failures in previous launches.” CNN was more direct with its slant, writing “SpaceX’s troubled Starship prototype pulls off successful flight after months of explosive mishaps” on its headline.
While some media outlets evidently adopted a negative slant towards Starship’s Flight 10 results, several other media sources actually published surprisingly positive articles about the successful test flight. The most notable of which is arguably the New York Times, which featured a headline that read “SpaceX’s Giant Mars Rocket Completes Nearly Flawless Test Flight.” Fox News also ran with a notably positive headline that read “SpaceX succeeds at third Starship test flight attempt after multiple scrubs.”
Having covered Elon Musk-related companies for the better part of a decade now, I have learned that mainstream coverage of any of his companies tends to be sprinkled with varying degrees of negative slant. The reasons behind this may never be fully explained, but it is just the way things are. This is why, when milestones such as Starship’s Flight 10 actually happen and mainstream media coverage becomes somewhat objective, I can’t help but be amazed.
After all, it takes one heck of a company led by one heck of a leader to force objectivity on an entity that has proven subjective over the years. And that, if any, is all the proof one could need about the undeniable success of Starship Flight 10.
-
News5 days ago
Tesla is overhauling its Full Self-Driving subscription for easier access
-
Elon Musk6 days ago
Elon Musk shares unbelievable Starship Flight 10 landing feat
-
Elon Musk6 days ago
Elon Musk reveals when SpaceX will perform first-ever Starship catch
-
Elon Musk1 week ago
SpaceX Starship Flight 10 was so successful, it’s breaking the anti-Musk narrative
-
News2 days ago
Tesla appears to be mulling a Cyber SUV design
-
News6 days ago
Tesla expands crazy new lease deal for insane savings on used inventory
-
News5 days ago
Tesla talks Semi ramp, Optimus, Robotaxi rollout, FSD with Wall Street firm
-
News7 days ago
Tesla launches Full Self-Driving in a new region