News
SpaceX lobbies NASA to foster competitive deep space exploration
Tim Hughes, the senior VP of SpaceX’s global business and government affairs, testified earlier this morning before the Senate Subcommittee on Space, Science, and Technology and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Technology. He put forth a strong argument that it would be in the best interests of both NASA and the United States to encourage commercial competition in pursuit of the exploration of deep space, and that this could be done with concrete goals like improved interplanetary communications, vertically landing spacecraft on the Moon, and sending substantial amounts of cargo to Mars.
Before joining SpaceX, Hughes was the central actor responsible for drafting and supporting the Commercial Space Launch Amendments Act of 2004, which effectively paved the way for NASA’s first programs of commercial competition just two years later. He joined the company in 2005, and has defined SpaceX’s approach to legal and government affairs in the many years since.
Leveraging data related to the major successes and efficiency of NASA’s Commercial Orbital Transport Services (COTS) initiative, which began in earnest in 2006, Hughes demonstrated that by awarding SpaceX with funds from COTS, NASA ultimately found themselves with a highly-capable orbital launch vehicle after a relatively miniscule investment of $396 million into the venture. A study later conducted by NASA estimated that developing the same vehicle with a traditional NASA or commercial approach would have cost approximately $4 billion or $1.7 billion respectively, implying that the COTS approach was as much as ten times more efficient than NASA’s own traditional strategies of launch vehicle procurement.
SpaceX’s CRS-11 mission just over a month ago was the company’s 10th successful transport of cargo to the ISS. (SpaceX)
Of course, SpaceX themselves invested over $500 million initially following NASA’s COTS award, but NASA’s bode of confidence in the company likely made it possible in the first place for it to raise that level of funding. The point of this presented data, of course, is to segue into the argument that the introduction of commercial competition into the field of deep space exploration could also benefit NASA in the sense that it might be drastically more cost effective than current approaches. Hughes did not explicitly call out any current programs during his testimony, but the clear figureheads are the Space Launch System and Orion. Such a request from private industry also acts as a bit of a gentle suggestion to those in NASA, related Congressional and Senatorial committees. Subcommittees that past and current traditional strategies of hardware procurement for space exploration may be showing signs of age and obsolescence in the face of more efficient commercial ventures.
In fact, NASA’s Chief of Spaceflight, Bill Gerstenmaier, admitted earlier today in a very rare streak of candor that he “[couldn’t] put a date on humans on Mars” and that that was a result of a severe lack of budget to design and build the myriad technologies, hardware, and vehicles necessary to actually take advantage of a heavy launch vehicle like the Space Launch System. NASA is admittedly beginning to pursue and request industry information for what they are calling a Deep Space Gateway or NEXTSTEP, intended to be a small orbital base or space station located closer to the Moon than to Earth. A successfully-developed DSG would indeed become one completed facet of the architecture needed to bring humans to Mars, and can be compared in concept to SpaceX’s Big Falcon Spaceship in a limited fashion.
-
- Boeing (pictured here), SNC, and five other companies all produced concepts that are now being evaluated by NASA for the NEXTSTEP program. (Boeing)
-
- Sierra Nevada’s NEXTSTEP cislunar station concept. (SNC)
-
- SpaceX’s conceptual Interplanetary Transport System from 2016 was considerably larger and more structurally complex than 2017’s BFR. (SpaceX)
Given Gestenmaier’s frank admittance that NASA’s budget is not presently able to support even a fraction of what is necessary for their “Journey to Mars”, exploring alternative methods of more efficiently exploiting the money NASA could realistically make available for further deep space exploration is almost certainly a major priority, or it at least ought to be. Gertsenmaier’s unspoken need for more efficient methods of exploring Mars and deep space would perfectly mesh with the requested program SpaceX’s Tim Hughes also presented earlier today, and the potential benefits SpaceX might also reap from such an arrangement make it worth serious consideration.
The political and corporate mire that NASA is almost innately intertwined with is the primary and most obvious barrier to the existence of a deep space COTS-esque program, but it is possible that some amount of calculated politicking on behalf of SpaceX could result in the right Senators or Representatives getting behind SpaceX’s mission of cost-effective space exploration.
The Tesla Model X has always been one of the company’s most loved vehicles, despite its low sales figures, which can be attributed to its high price tag.
However, the Model X has been a signature item on Tesla’s menu of cars, most notably recognized by its Falcon Wing Doors, which are aware of its surroundings and open according to what’s around it.
But recent improvements to the Model X were looking slim to none, but it appears most of the fixes actually happened under the body, at least according to Tesla’s Vice President of Powertrain, Lars Moravy.
In a recent interview with Car and Driver, Moravy detailed all of the changes to the 2026 iteration of the vehicle, which was about 400 pounds lighter than it was originally. The biggest change is a modification with the rear motor, switching from an induction-type motor to a permanent-magnet design and optimizing the half-shafts, which shed about 100 pounds.
Tesla also got “almost 80 pounds out of the interior bits and pieces,” which “included making parts thinner, different manufacturing process choices, and incorporating airbag-deployment requirements into the headliner fabric,” the report said.
Additionally, the standard five-passenger, bench seat configuration saved 50 pounds by ditching pedestal mounting. This also helped with practicality, as it helped the seat fold flat. Engineers at Tesla also saved 44 pounds from the high-voltage wiring through optimizing the wiring from the charge-port DC/DC converter and switching from copper to aluminum wiring.
Tesla makes a decision on the future of its flagship Model S and Model X
Tesla also simplified the cooling system by reducing the number of radiators. It also incorporated Nürburgring cooling requirements for the Plaid variant, which saved nearly 30 pounds.
Many Tesla fans will be familiar with the megacastings, manufactured in-house by presses from IDRA, which also saves more than 20 pounds and boosts torsional stiffness by around 10 percent. Tweaks to the suspension also saved 10 pounds.
People were truly disappointed with what Tesla did with the Model S and Model X, arguing that the cars needed a more severe exterior overhaul, which might be true. However, Tesla really did a lot to reduce the weight of the vehicle, which helps increase range and efficiency. According to Grok, every 200 pounds removed adds between 7 and 15 percent to range estimations.
This makes sense considering the range estimations both increased by 7 percent from the Model X’s 2025 configuration to the 2026 builds. Range increased on the All-Wheel-Drive trim from 329 miles to 352 miles, while the Plaid went from 314 miles to 335 miles.
Tesla has officially launched its first branded Supercharger just months after initiating a new program that allows third-party companies to brand their own charging piles.
The site opened in Land O’ Lakes, Florida, and features eight V4 Supercharging stalls offering up to 325 kW of charging speed. It appears it was purchased by a company called Suncoast Credit Union. This particular branch is located Northeast of Tampa, which is on the Gulf of Mexico.
It features graphics of Florida animals, like alligators:
Here’s a video of the graphics being installed on the Tesla Superchargers at this site: https://t.co/oIfEPNZjAH pic.twitter.com/ENWakZ2qT9
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) November 20, 2025
Tesla launched this program back in September, and it basically was a way to expand its Supercharger presence and also allow companies to pay for the infrastructure. Tesla maintains it. When it announced the “Supercharger for Business,” it said:
“Purchase and install Superchargers at your business. Superchargers are compatible with all electric vehicles, bringing EV drivers to your business by offering convenient, reliable charging.”
The program does a few things. Initially, it expands EV charging infrastructure and makes charging solutions more readily available for drivers. It can also attract people to those businesses specifically.
Tesla launches new Supercharger program that business owners will love
The chargers can also be branded with any logo that the business chooses, which makes them more personalized and also acts as an advertisement.
The best part is that the customers do not have to maintain anything about the Supercharger. Tesla still takes care of it and resolves any issues:
“We treat your site like we treat our sites. By providing you with a full-service package that includes network operations, preventative maintenance, and driver support, we’re able to guarantee 97% uptime–the highest in the industry.”
It appears the Superchargers will also appear within the in-car nav during routing, so they’ll be publicly available to anyone who needs to use them. They are still available to all EVs that have worked with Tesla to utilize its infrastructure, and they are not restricted to people who are only visiting the business.
Tesla has revealed its Cybertruck light bar installation fix after a recall exposed a serious issue with the accessory.
Tesla and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) initiated a recall of 6,197 Cybertrucks back in October to resolve an issue with the Cybertruck light bar accessory. It was an issue with the adhesive that was provided by a Romanian company called Hella Romania S.R.L.
Tesla recalls 6,197 Cybertrucks for light bar adhesive issue
The issue was with the primer quality, as the recall report from the NHTSA had stated the light bar had “inadvertently attached to the windshield using the incorrect surface primer.”
Instead of trying to adhere the light bar to the Cybertruck with an adhesive, Tesla is now going to attach it with a bracketing system, which will physically mount it to the vehicle instead of relying on adhesive strips or glue.
Tesla outlines this in its new Service Bulletin, labeled SB-25-90-001, (spotted by Not a Tesla App) where it shows the light bar will be remounted more securely:
The entire process will take a few hours, but it can be completed by the Mobile Service techs, so if you have a Cybertruck that needs a light bar adjustment, it can be done without taking the vehicle to the Service Center for repair.
However, the repair will only happen if there is no delamination or damage present; then Tesla could “retrofit the service-installed optional off-road light bar accessory with a positive mechanical attachment.”
The company said it would repair the light bar at no charge to customers. The light bar issue was one that did not result in any accidents or injuries, according to the NHTSA’s report.
This was the third recall on Cybertruck this year, as one was highlighted in March for exterior trim panels detaching during operation. Another had to do with front parking lights being too bright, which was fixed with an Over-the-Air update last month.
Tesla Model X lost 400 pounds thanks to these changes
Tesla launches its new branded Supercharger for Business with first active station
