News
SpaceX-launched Uranus mission a top priority of new decadal survey
The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine have published their latest decadal survey of planetary science and astrobiology, revealing a recommendation that NASA prioritize the development of a flagship mission to Uranus baselined to launch on SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy rocket.
Known as the Uranus Orbiter and Probe or UOP, the mission proposal has been under development by a team of NASA, University of California, and Johns Hopkins University scientists and engineers for several years. In fact, a very similar concept ranked third in the Academies’ 2013-2022 decadal survey flagship recommendations, reiterating its central importance and potential value in the eyes of the survey’s dozens of contributors. According to its creators, in its latest iteration, the Uranus Orbiter and Probe have the potential to fully or partially answer 11 of the 12 primary questions the latest Decadal Survey structured itself around.
Additionally, the survey indirectly states that if it weren’t for the existence of one specific technology, it would have been a wash between a mission to Uranus or Neptune. That keystone: SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy rocket.
While the survey’s authors don’t explicitly point to SpaceX in the context of UOP, they do state that “a Uranus mission is favored because an end-to-end mission concept exists that can be implemented in the 2023-2032 decade on currently available launch vehicles.” In reality, there only appears to be one launch vehicle: Falcon Heavy. Three other alternatives do technically exist: United Launch Alliance’s (ULA) Vulcan Centaur, Blue Origin’s New Glenn, and NASA’s own Space Launch System (SLS).
NASA’s Europa Clipper orbiter – originally manifested on SLS but later moved to SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy to avoid major launch delays – has helped demonstrate that SLS isn’t viable for non-Artemis Program missions without massive production improvements and significant workarounds or design changes. While capable in many regards, Blue Origin’s reusable New Glenn rocket appears to have extremely poor performance beyond Earth orbit – well below what UOP requires – and is unlikely to launch before 2024 or 2025. It’s possible that an expendable New Glenn could suffice but Blue Origin has never mentioned the option and, even then, the rocket’s expendable performance could still fall short.
Finally, ULA’s expendable Vulcan Centaur rocket has yet to launch and its debut could easily slip into 2023. More importantly, according to official information provided by the company to a NASA-run performance calculator, even Vulcan’s most capable variant (VC6) with six solid rocket boosters (SRBs) simply doesn’t have the performance required to launch the Uranus Orbiter and Probe (7235 kg / 15,950 lb) on seven of the mission’s preferred trajectories. For three other secondary windows, Vulcan could potentially launch UOP but only with the inclusion of a Venus gravity assist that would require significant design changes to protect the spacecraft while traveling much closer to the sun.
According to NASA’s calculator, a fully-expendable Falcon Heavy rocket with a standard payload fairing could launch around 8.5-10 tons (18,700-22,000 lb) to UOP’s preferred trajectories, leaving a very healthy margin for spacecraft weight gain or launch underperformance and likely enabling a longer launch window for each opportunity.
If NASA agrees with the survey’s conclusions, decides to develop the Uranus Orbiter and Probe, and also plans on the Academies’ optimistic assumption of an ~18% budget increase on average from 2023 to 2032, work towards a preferred 2031 launch window could begin in earnest as early as 2024. Comprised of a namesake Orbiter and Probe, UOP would arrive in orbit around Uranus in late 2044 or early 2045 weighing around five metric tons (~11,000 lb). The primary science mission would begin by deploying a small atmospheric probe to directly analyze the composition and behavior of the planet’s exotic atmosphere, which is believed to be volatile, prone to vast and violent storms, and host to some of the most extreme winds in the solar system. The probe would weigh ~270 kilograms (~600 lb) and is only expected to survive for a few hours at most.
The orbiter, however, would continue on to tour the Uranian system for at least four years, observing and studying the ice giant and its rings, magnetosphere, and 27+ moons. Uranus itself resides in what may be the most common class of exoplanets in the universe, making a close study of it invaluable for exoplanet science as a whole. It’s also possible that – like several moons around Saturn and Jupiter – one or more Uranian moons have liquid water oceans created by tidal heating, adding to the list of extraterrestrial bodies that might feature habitable environments or alien life.
Tesla launched unsupervised Robotaxi service in San Antonio, Texas, on November 9, 2026, with the first rides beginning at 5 a.m. local time.
The company’s official Robotaxi account on X posted the announcement just after midnight, sharing a map that outlines a large operational zone covering much of the city. The geofence is roughly 274 to 275 square miles, making it Tesla’s largest day-one Robotaxi service area to date.
🚨 Tesla just announced that Robotaxi is available in San Antonio, TX
First rides at 5am local time! https://t.co/azck6NlD8H
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) November 9, 2026
The zone centers on downtown, covers nearly everything inside Loop 410, and extends north to Loop 1604 between Interstate 10 and U.S. 281, with further reach west past State Highway 151, east beyond I-35, and south toward I-37. This area encompasses about one million residents and hundreds of thousands of jobs.
San Antonio International Airport lies inside the geofence, though Tesla is not currently offering airport pickups or drop-offs. This hopefully will happen soon, as ride-sharing to and from the airport can be expensive.
The launch makes San Antonio Tesla’s eighth unsupervised Robotaxi city and its fifth in Texas, joining Austin, Houston, Dallas, and Fort Worth. Florida markets in Miami, Orlando, and Tampa are also live.
🚨 Here’s every active geofence, by size (not including the Bay Area geofence):
• Austin: 435 sq mi (first ride Jun 22, 2025) · Cybercabs live, expanded today • San Antonio: ~275 sq mi (first ride Nov 9, 2026) • Houston: 254 sq mi (Apr 18, 2026) • Fort Worth: 143 sq mi (Nov 2, 2026) • Dallas: 81 sq mi (Apr 18, 2026) • Miami: 31 sq mi (Jul 3, 2026) • Orlando: 26 sq mi (Jul 21, 2026) • Tampa: 24 sq mi (Jul 21, 2026)
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) November 9, 2026
Service uses modified Model Y vehicles operating without a safety driver in the vehicle, consistent with recent unsupervised expansions. Cybercab two-seaters remain limited primarily to Austin for now. It’s worth noting that Dept. of Transportation officials in Texas have already ok’d the Cybercab’s operation in Austin, and one official called it “a tangible example of how quickly our transportation system is evolving.”
San Antonio was previously listed among near-term targets in Tesla’s October 2026 Robotaxi safety materials, alongside Las Vegas, Phoenix, and Jacksonville. The rapid Texas rollout follows Fort Worth’s unsupervised debut on November 2 and builds on Austin’s original launch in June 2025.
The 274-square-mile debut remains substantially larger than Waymo’s local footprint and marks continued progress in Tesla’s unsupervised autonomy efforts after starting the year with no such rides. The company has stated ambitions for broader 24/7 operations by the end of 2026 as vehicle counts and software reliability improve.
Tesla has started to perform earthworks engineering on the roughly 3,000-acre site in Fort Bend County, Texas, advancing the massive $10 billion Project Crystal Sun plan to build a vertically integrated solar manufacturing complex.
Flyover drone footage from S.E. Robinson, Jr. released this morning shows the location under development. Tesla has crews on site performing large clearings, but you can also see equipment staging areas, the use of an existing homestead, and active leveling across a substantial portion of the property.
Tesla has started construction on Project Crystal Sun, its $10B vertically integrated solar factory near Houston, Texas.
The plant will make everything from silicon ingots and wafers to finished cells and panels, with operations targeted for Q1 2029.
@SERobinsonJr with a great flyover of the facility:
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) November 9, 2026
Public filings first submitted in July under Texas’s Jobs, Energy, Technology and Innovation Act describe a plant that would manufacture the full solar chain: everything from silicon ingots, wafers, coated cells, and finished modules.
Tesla projects 9,712 permanent jobs by 2033, ramping from roughly 1,900 positions in the first year of operations, plus a peak of about 1,147 construction jobs. Construction is targeted for 2026–2028, with commercial production beginning in the first quarter of 2029. An accompanying economic analysis estimates the project could add roughly $107 billion to Texas GDP over several decades.
Local incentives have cleared major hurdles. Lamar Consolidated Independent School District unanimously approved school-tax limitations in September, and Fort Bend County commissioners approved a package of abatements and related agreements in late October that could extend equipment tax breaks for as long as 35 years.
Tesla had previously indicated it was evaluating a competing out-of-state location.
The effort fits broader statements by Musk that Tesla and SpaceX are each working toward 100 gigawatts of annual U.S. solar manufacturing capacity. If built as described, Project Crystal Sun would stand as one of the largest domestic attempts to create a fully integrated solar supply chain on American soil.
While Tesla has not issued a formal groundbreaking announcement, the visible site preparation and high-profile social media activity represent a concrete step forward for a project that has moved from confidential filings to active earthworks in a matter of months.
Elon Musk continues to shed more reasons that justify the cancelation of the Tesla Cybertruck, but some of the reasons for the sunset, as well as the process the company is choosing, do not make a lot of sense.
Musk announced last week on X that Tesla would wind down Cybertruck production in mid-2027, a decision that aims to prioritize Cybercab and its importance to the company’s future and passenger transportation as a whole.
But some of what Tesla and Musk are saying does not seem to make much sense. From the process the company is taking with orders to some of the reasoning for the cancelation, the whole situation seems strange.
With that being said: I totally see the merit in prioritizing Cybercab, but I also believe there is room for Cybertruck, a vehicle that has traditionally had low volumes, especially now at its current price point. If it were not for the cancelation, Cybertruck would sell very few units with the recent price adjustments.
Musk Talks Order Rate vs. Production Rate
The first thing that does not make a lot of sense here is the fact that this morning, Musk said that “The Cybertruck order rate far exceeds our production rate. We will try to make as any as possible before shutting down the line in about 8 months, but will have to return deposits for a lot of people.”
The Cybertruck order rate far exceeds our production rate. We will try to make as many as possible before shutting down the line in about 8 months, but will have to return deposits for a lot of people.
This is not a case of Cybertruck being unprofitable, as has been misreported by legacy media, but rather that the opportunity cost of the complexity of Cybertruck is vastly outweighed by the value of incremental Cybercab production.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 9, 2026
Then why is Tesla STILL accepting orders for the Cybertruck if it already cannot fulfill its order log by mid-2027?
There are so many people ordering Cybertruck that will not receive it. If Tesla already is having trouble seeing how it will build its current orders, why would it allow additional ones?
There are going to be a lot of people who are very upset next June or July, all because they placed an order for a truck that Tesla knew it would not have the time to build. At this point, it seems like a better idea from a customer service standpoint to simply stop accepting orders on a certain date, build those trucks, fulfill those orders, and then close production.
Continuing to accept orders at this point seems wildly strange. If anything, it feels like the $59k Cybertruck orderers will be the ones who get the short end of the stick here, but that’s speculation and just a hunch on my end.
If not Cybertruck, then what?
With only the Model 3 and Model Y available for consumers, meaning the general public, to buy, there is now no utility vehicle in the Tesla lineup, and that is definitely a disappointment.
Ford already washed its hands of the Lightning, which means the Rivian R1T will likely be the best-selling EV pickup on the market, dueling with the GMC Hummer Pickup, Chevy Silverado EV, and the GMC Sierra EV. There are several pickups that are set to hit the market soon, like the Slate EV Truck, and Ford’s new EV pickup, the Fathom.
Tesla could provide some some transparency on what it is planning to do with a future pickup or utility design. Musk said in the past that something much cooler than a minivan will be built. Cries for a full-size SUV have been heard by Tesla, but the company seems to adamant on prioritizing ridesharing vehicles instead of vehicles people want for work, climate, or hobbies.
Some clarity here, past the point of “Tesla is still going to build cars” would be nice. Even a simple, “Yes” response from all the people asking if Tesla will build something larger would be more than enough. We don’t need all the details now, but something would be nice.
Closing Thoughts
More than anything, it is important to note that I do believe Tesla is making a tough decision and one that, from a business standpoint, does make sense. However, I also believe that there is room for the Cybertruck in Tesla’s lineup.
One thing I think it’s worth mentioning is Tesla is not that much different from many companies. They do things that are better for the business that will surely upset consumers. The difference is very few companies have a following like Tesla, so when these things happen, they feel very personal.
Add in the fact that Cybertruck has truly become a symbol of Tesla, and people are even more upset about it.
It will all get figured out, but it’s still very confusing when we step back and take a look at the bigger picture.
Tesla Robotaxi enters its newest city, reaching San Antonio
Tesla begins groundworks on $10B ‘Project Crystal Sun’ in Texas
