News
SpaceX waits in the wings as NASA risks maiming Jupiter probe to pinch pennies
SpaceX and its Falcon Heavy rocket continue to wait in the wings as NASA risks maiming its ‘Europa Clipper’ Jupiter probe by pinching the wrong pennies.
For the second time, NASA has performed “continuation/termination reviews” of three of the Europa Clipper spacecraft’s scientific instruments after budget overruns on the order of no more than a few tens of millions of dollars. Thankfully, no instruments were canceled, unlike the “ICEMAG” magnetometer that was functionally killed last year. Still, a NASA program scientist casually noted that the space agency would tolerate launching without one of two cameras and would offer no more funding to a mass spectrometer instrument (MASPEX), raising the risk of instrument failure during the challenging mission.
For any scientific spacecraft or rover, the instruments carried along are effectively the entire reason for their existence: if those instruments are faulty (or even removed before launch), the mission is effectively rendered pointless. Further, due to the sheer complexity and challenges posed by the act of getting to the destination and surviving after arrival, the actual instruments most scientific spacecraft carry represent a tiny fraction of the overall mission cost and mass. It’s not easy to readily imagine a better way to signal inept program management than by singularly focusing on that tiny, lifeblood-esque portion of a spacecraft’s budget. Undeterred, that is exactly what NASA appears to be doing with Europa Clipper – penny-wise, perhaps, but undoubtedly pound-foolish.

It’s not always true that only a small portion of an exploratory spacecraft’s budget is spent on scientific instruments but it absolutely is when it comes to Europa Clipper. Originally hoped to cost as little as $2 billion in 2013, Europa Clipper’s budget allocation has ballooned to $4.5 billion over the life of the program. Of that $4.5 billion, as little as $110M was dedicated to nine scientific instruments assigned to the spacecraft – a ratio of ~41:1. Even if instrument cost ballooned by 100% to ~$220 million, it would still be a measly 20:1. The space environment around Jupiter is admittedly one of the most challenging in the Solar System, warranting some imbalance, but either ratio is still exceptionally bad as far as most exploratory missions go.
Designed to create detailed maps of Europa’s theorized water oceans, ICEMAG, for example, jumped from a $30 million cost estimate to $45 million before NASA abruptly killed it. A Clipper planetary scientist called ICEMAG “a critical instrument that’s been central to Europa science forever”. MASPEX, meanwhile, is a mass spectrometer that will be used to analyze possible chemicals captured by flying through Europa’s transient atmosphere (or, even better yet, plumes from vast ocean geysers). In other words, the instrument most likely to be hobbled next by NASA is also the only instrument on Europa Clipper capable of potentially detecting signs of life by directly sampling material ejected by Europa’s plumes.
Even just with ICEMAG removed, the value proposition of a $4.5 billion mission to an ocean moon of Jupiter becomes much hazier. With ICEMAG removed and MASPEX at risk of being thrown to the wolves, Europa Clipper’s purpose becomes even weaker. Of course, seven valuable instruments remain – some of which partially overlap with MASPEX’ goals – and MASPEX could still technically make it to the finish line in its original handicap-free state, but the tides are definitely not moving in an encouraging direction.


The worst part is that excluding the extraordinarily expensive spacecraft that will host instruments worth ~3-5% its cost, Congress has been dead-set on forcing Europa Clipper to launch on NASA’s chronically-delayed, over-budget Space Launch System (SLS) rocket. SLS has yet to launch once despite more than a decade of development and almost $30 billion spent on the rocket alone, and it would take a miracle for an SLS rocket to be ready to launch Clipper before 2025 or 2026. Europa Clipper is working towards a launch no earlier than 2024, meaning that the spacecraft would have to be stored indefinitely at a cost of at least $125 million per year.
Intrepid readers may note that the cost of simply waiting a single year for SLS to be ready for launch is higher than the cost of all of Europa Clipper’s scientific instruments at their original $110 million budget. The actual cost to NASA for a single SLS launch is expected to $1.5 billion at the absolute minimum, while $2-2.5 billion is far more reasonable. With a little effort and some moderate cruise stage tweaks, Ars Technica has already reported that an expendable SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket augmented with an off-the-shelf kick stage could send Europa Clipper to Jupiter in 5-6 years, compared to ~3 with SLS.


Ironically, that means that if Falcon Heavy was ready to launch Europa Clipper when the spacecraft is expected to be ready in 2024, it would actually arrive at the same time (or close) if it launched on SLS – once a minimum two-year launch vehicle delay is accounted for. A Falcon Heavy would also save NASA at least $1-2 billion, while it would directly save the Europa Clipper program the ~$250 million it would otherwise need to spend to store the spacecraft while waiting years for an SLS rocket. That $250 million alone – an inevitable add-on cost if SLS is chosen – could easily double the budget of every single Europa Clipper science instrument, adding plenty of breathing room, reinstating ICEMAG, and likely improving the science they output – data-gathering quite literally being the whole purpose of the mission.
Of course, the odds that NASA actually steps out from under the political shadow of SLS and stops playing penny wise and pound foolish with the extraordinarily expensive science missions it shepherds is unlikely. But still, the possibility (and hope) remains. Most recently, a very slight change in the wording of a proposed law (bill) could give the Europa Clipper program the legal wiggle room it needs to sidestep Congress’ desire to force it to launch on SLS. Of course, the senators and representatives with parochial attachment to the rocket will continue to fight tooth and nail to legally force it upon NASA at every possible turn, but there is now at least a chance of a sane outcome.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
News
Tesla rolls out most aggressive Model Y lease deal in the US yet
With the promotion in place, customers would be able to take home a Model Y at a very low cost.
Tesla has rolled out what could very well be its most aggressive promotion for Model Y leases in the United States yet. With the promotion in place, customers would be able to take home a Model Y at a very low cost.
Zero downpayment leases
The new Model Y lease promotion was initially reported on X, with industry watcher Sawyer Merritt stating that while the vehicles’ monthly payments are still similar to before, the cars can now be ordered with a $0 downpayment.
Tesla community members noted that this promotion would cut the full payment cost of Model Y leases by several thousand dollars, though prices were still a bit better when the $7,500 federal tax credit was still in effect. Despite this, a $0 downpayment would likely be appreciated by customers, as it lowers the entry point to the Tesla ecosystem by a notable margin.
Premium freebies included
Apart from a $0 downpayment, customers of Model Y leases are also provided one free upgrade for their vehicles. These upgrades could be premium paint, such as Pearl White Multi-Coat, Deep Blue Metallic, Diamond Black, Quicksilver or Ultra Red, or 20″ Helix 2.0 Wheels. Customers could also opt for a White Interior or a Tow Hitch free of charge.
A look at Tesla’s Model Y order page shows that the promotion is available for all the Model Y Premium Rear-Wheel Drive and the Model Y Premium All-Wheel Drive. The Model Y Standard and the Model Y Performance are not eligible for the $0 downpayment or free premium upgrade promotion as of writing.
@teslarati 🚨 Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.1.7 is here and here’s some things it did extremely well! #tesla #teslafsd #fullselfdriving ♬ You Have It – Marscott
News
Tesla is looking to phase out China-made parts at US factories: report
Tesla has reportedly swapped out several China-made components already, aiming to complete the transition within the next two years.
Tesla has reportedly started directing its suppliers to eliminate China-made components from vehicles built in the United States. This would make Tesla’s US-produced vehicles even more American-made.
The update was initially reported by The Wall Street Journal.
Accelerating North American sourcing
As per the WSJ report, the shift reportedly came amidst escalating tariff uncertainties between Washington and Beijing. Citing people reportedly familiar with the matter, the publication claimed that Tesla has already swapped out several China-made components, aiming to complete the transition within the next two years. The publication also claimed that Tesla has been reducing its reliance on China-based suppliers since the pandemic disrupted supply chains.
The company has quietly increased North American sourcing over the past two years as tariff concerns have intensified. If accurate, Tesla would likely end up with vehicles that are even more locally sourced than they are today. It would remain to be seen, however, if a change in suppliers for its US-made vehicles would result in price adjustments for cars like the Model 3 and Model Y.
Industry-wide reassessments
Tesla is not alone in reevaluating its dependence on China. Auto executives across the automotive industry have been in rapid-response mode amid shifting trade policies, chip supply anxiety, and concerns over rare-earth materials. Fluctuating tariffs between the United States and China during President Donald Trump’s current term have made pricing strategies quite unpredictable as well, as noted in a Reuters report.
General Motors this week issued a similar directive to thousands of suppliers, instructing them to remove China-origin components from their supply chains. The same is true for Stellantis, which also announced earlier this year that it was implementing several strategies to avoid tariffs that were placed by the Trump administration.
@teslarati 🚨 Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.1.7 is here and here’s some things it did extremely well! #tesla #teslafsd #fullselfdriving ♬ You Have It – Marscott
News
Tesla owners propose interesting theory about Apple CarPlay and EV tax credit
“100%. It’s needed for sales because for many prospective buyers, CarPlay is a nonnegotiable must-have. If they knew how good the Tesla UI is, they wouldn’t think they need CarPlay,” one owner said.
Tesla is reportedly bracing for the integration of Apple’s well-known iOS automotive platform, CarPlay, into its vehicles after the company had avoided it for years.
However, now that it’s here, owners are more than clear that they do not want it, and they have their theories about why it’s on its way. Some believe it might have to do with the EV tax credit, or rather, the loss of it.
Owners are more interested in why Tesla is doing this now, especially considering that so many have been outspoken about the fact that they would not use it in favor of the company’s user interface (UI), which is extremely well done.
After Bloomberg reported that Tesla was working on Apple CarPlay integration, the reactions immediately started pouring in. From my perspective, having used both Apple CarPlay in two previous vehicles and going to Tesla’s in-house UI in my Model Y, both platforms definitely have their advantages.
However, Tesla’s UI just works with its vehicles, as it is intuitive and well-engineered for its cars specifically. Apple CarPlay was always good, but it was buggy at times, which could be attributed to the vehicle and not the software, and not as user-friendly, but that is subjective.
Nevertheless, upon the release of Bloomberg’s report, people immediately challenged the need for it:
Everyone thinks they need it. I would think that too if I didn’t know how good Tesla’s interface was. CarPlay is a crappy layer on top of crappy info-navs, and people think it’s an imperative because it provides a level of consistency from car to car. They have no clue how much…
— Rich Stafford (@r26174_rich) November 14, 2025
How can it not be when the best engineers choose Tesla over Apple and Tesla’s core focus is auto vs Apple being mobile. It’s what Tesla does every day. It’s a side project for Apple. Still Apple is much better than any other auto OEM who attract lesser talent and make digital…
— Emu (@confessedemu) November 14, 2025
Some fans proposed an interesting point: What if Tesla is using CarPlay as a counter to losing the $7,500 EV tax credit? Perhaps it is an interesting way to attract customers who have not owned a Tesla before but are more interested in having a vehicle equipped with CarPlay?
“100%. It’s needed for sales because for many prospective buyers, CarPlay is a nonnegotiable must-have. If they knew how good the Tesla UI is, they wouldn’t think they need CarPlay,” one owner said.
Tesla has made a handful of moves to attract people to its cars after losing the tax credit. This could be a small but potentially mighty strategy that will pull some carbuyers to Tesla, especially now that the Apple CarPlay box is checked.
@teslarati :rotating_light: This is why you need to use off-peak rates at Tesla Superchargers! #tesla #evcharging #fyp ♬ Blue Moon – Muspace Lofi
-
News1 week agoTesla shares rare peek at Semi factory’s interior
-
Elon Musk1 week agoTesla says texting and driving capability is coming ‘in a month or two’
-
News1 week agoTesla makes online ordering even easier
-
News1 week agoTesla Model Y Performance set for new market entrance in Q1
-
News1 week agoTesla Cybercab production starts Q2 2026, Elon Musk confirms
-
News6 days agoTesla is launching a crazy new Rental program with cheap daily rates
-
News1 week agoTesla China expecting full FSD approval in Q1 2026: Elon Musk
-
News1 week agoTesla Model Y Performance is rapidly moving toward customer deliveries