Connect with us

News

SpaceX’s NASA Starship contract prevails over frivolous Blue Origin, Dynetics protests

A render of SpaceX's proposed Starship Moon lander besides SN15, the first full-scale Starship to successfully land. (SpaceX)

Published

on

The US Government Accountability Office (GAO) has thrown out frivolous protests filed by Blue Origin and Dynetics after NASA awarded SpaceX a $2.9B contract to develop a crewed Starship Moon lander.

In mid-April, NASA announced that it had chosen SpaceX and SpaceX alone to develop a Starship-derived lander capable of returning humanity to the Moon more than half a century after astronauts last stepped foot on Earth’s neighbor. Ultimately, in the context of dismal Congressional support, NASA analyzed proposals submitted by SpaceX, Dynetics, and a Blue Origin-led team and concluded that Congress had only provided enough funding for the space agency to pick a single provider.

By awarding more than one contract, NASA could feasibly ensure – like it did with its Commercial Crew and Cargo programs – that a delay or failure of one vehicle wouldn’t guarantee a program-wide delay. However, thanks to Congress appropriating a pathetic $850M (1/4th) of the $3.4B NASA requested for Human Landing System (HLS) development, awarding two contracts would guarantee that HLS would be delayed years beyond its 2024 target for a crewed Moon landing. Ultimately, though NASA had demonstrated a desire to proceed with more than one HLS provider, the agency unsurprisingly concluded that it would have to pick only the best of the three competitors.

In a wholly unexpected twist, NASA ultimately determined that SpaceX’s Starship proposal was simultaneously the cheapest and the most competent of the three, rating above or equal to Blue Origin and Dynetics in two main categories. Unsurprisingly, NASA thus chose to award an HLS “Option A” contract to SpaceX alone, citing the agency’s own repeated qualifications that its desire to make multiple awards was “dependent upon funding availability.”

Advertisement

It eventually became clear that Blue Origin’s proposal – the second cheapest, according to NASA – had requested more than $6 billion, making it more than twice as expensive as SpaceX’s offering. In her selection statement, NASA Associate Administrator Kathy Lueders (former head of the extraordinarily successful Commercial Crew Program) noted that the funding left after SpaceX’s $2.94B award was “so insubstantial” that it would have been insulting and a waste of time to even attempt to negotiate Blue Origin’s $6B request down to a feasible number

As would soon become clear, both Blue Origin and Dynetics were apparently furious with NASA’s reasonable, consistent, and well-explained decision and immediately filed protests with GAO, effectively preventing NASA from working on HLS in any consequential fashion. Available for anyone to read, both protests were so frivolous and petty that it was hard to believe any serious, professional company would willingly attach their name to either.

Thankfully, although GAO took 95 of the 100 days it was allowed for the decision, the federal watchdog ultimately agreed that both Blue Origin’s and Dynetics’ protests were almost entirely meritless, save for one minute, unspecified waiver NASA allowed SpaceX. As NASA noted in an official response to GAO’s decision, the demise of both protests means that the space agency can finally get back to work with SpaceX, begin dispersing funds the company fairly won, and establish a timeline and provide updates on plans to land humans on the Moon for the first time in half a century.

Eric Ralph is Teslarati's senior spaceflight reporter and has been covering the industry in some capacity for almost half a decade, largely spurred in 2016 by a trip to Mexico to watch Elon Musk reveal SpaceX's plans for Mars in person. Aside from spreading interest and excitement about spaceflight far and wide, his primary goal is to cover humanity's ongoing efforts to expand beyond Earth to the Moon, Mars, and elsewhere.

Advertisement
Comments

News

Anti-Tesla union leader ditches X, urges use of Threads instead

Tesla Sweden and IF Metall have been engaged in a bitter dispute for over two years now. 

Published

on

UK Government, CC BY 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

Marie Nilsson, chair of Sweden’s IF Metall union and a prominent critic of Tesla, has left X and is urging audiences to follow the union on Meta’s Threads instead.

Tesla Sweden and IF Metall have been engaged in a bitter dispute for over two years now. 

Anti-Tesla union leader exits X

In a comment to Dagens Arbete (DA), Nilsson noted that her exit from X is not formally tied to IF Metall’s long-running labor dispute with Tesla Sweden. Still, she stated that her departure is affected by changes to the platform under Elon Musk’s leadership.

“We have stayed because many journalists pick up news there. But as more and more people have left X, we have felt that the standard has now been reached on that platform,” she said. 

Advertisement

Jesper Pettersson, press officer at IF Metall, highlighted that the union’s departure from X is only indirectly linked to Tesla Sweden and Elon Musk. “Indirectly it does, since there is a lot of evidence that his ownership has caused the change in the platform to be so significant. 

“We have nevertheless assessed that the platform had value for reaching journalists, politicians and other opinion leaders. But it is a microscopic proportion of the public and our members who are there, and now that value has decreased,” Petterson added.

IF Metall sees Threads as an X alternative

After leaving X, IF Metall has begun using Threads, Meta’s alternative to the social media platform. The union described the move as experimental, noting that it is still evaluating how effective the platform will be for outreach and visibility.

Pettersson acknowledged that Meta also does not operate under Sweden’s collective bargaining model, but said the union sees little alternative if it wants to remain visible online.

Advertisement

“In a perfect world, all large international companies would be supporters of the Swedish model when they come here. But unfortunately, the reality is not like that. If we are to be visible at all in this social media world, we have to play by the rules of the game. The alternative would be to become completely invisible, and that would not benefit our members,” he said. 

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Elon Musk confirms SpaceX is not developing a phone

Published

on

elon musk phone
Photo: Boss Hunting.com.au

Despite many recent rumors and various reports, Elon Musk confirmed today that SpaceX is not developing a phone based on Starlink, not once, but twice.

Today’s report from Reuters cited people familiar with the matter and stated internal discussions have seen SpaceX executives mulling the idea of building a mobile device that would connect directly to the Starlink satellite constellation.

Musk did state in late January that SpaceX developing a phone was “not out of the question at some point.” However, He also said it would have to be a major difference from current phones, and would be optimized “purely for running max performance/watt neural nets.”

While Musk said it was not out of the question “at some point,” that does not mean it is currently a project SpaceX is working on. The CEO reaffirmed this point twice on X this afternoon.

Musk said, “Reuters lies relentlessly,” in one post. In the next, he explicitly stated, “We are not developing a phone.”

Musk has basically always maintained that SpaceX has too many things going on, denying that a phone would be in the realm of upcoming projects. There are too many things in the works for Musk’s space exploration company, most notably the recent merger with xAI.

SpaceX officially acquires xAI, merging rockets with AI expertise

A Starlink phone would be an excellent idea, especially considering that SpaceX operates 9,500 satellites, serving over 9 million users worldwide. 650 of those satellites are dedicated to the company’s direct-to-device initiative, which provides cellular coverage on a global scale.

Nevertheless, there is the potential that the Starlink phone eventually become a project SpaceX works on. However, it is not currently in the scope of what the company needs to develop, so things are more focused on that as of right now.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla adds notable improvement to Dashcam feature

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla has added a notable improvement to its Dashcam feature after complaints from owners have pushed the company to make a drastic change.

Perhaps one of the biggest frustrations that Tesla owners have communicated regarding the Dashcam feature is the lack of ability to retain any more than 60 minutes of driving footage before it is overwritten.

It does not matter what size USB jump drive is plugged into the vehicle. 60 minutes is all it will hold until new footage takes over the old. This can cause some issues, especially if you were saving an impressive clip of Full Self-Driving or an incident on the road, which could be lost if new footage was recorded.

This has now been changed, as Tesla has shown in the Release Notes for an upcoming Software Update in China. It will likely expand to the U.S. market in the coming weeks, and was first noticed by NotaTeslaApp.

The release notes state:

“Dashcam Dynamic Recording Duration – The dashcam dynamically adjusts the recording duration based on the available storage capacity of the connected USB drive. For example, with a 128 GB USB drive, the maximum recording duration is approximately 3 hours; with a 1 TB or larger USB drive, it can reach up to 24 hours. This ensures that as much video as possible is retained for review before it gets overwritten.”

Tesla Adds Dynamic Recording

Instead of having a 60-minute cap, the new system will now go off the memory in the USB drive. This means with:

  • 128 GB Jump Drive – Up to Three Hours of Rolling Footage
  • 1TB Jump Drive – Up to 24 Hours of Rolling Footage

This is dependent on the amount of storage available on the jump drive, meaning that if there are other things saved on it, it will take away from the amount of footage that can be retained.

While the feature is just now making its way to employees in China, it will likely be at least several weeks before it makes its way to the U.S., but owners should definitely expect it in the coming months.

It will be a welcome feature, especially as there will now be more customization to the number of clips and their duration that can be stored.

Continue Reading