News
SpaceX, NASA celebrate Blue Origin’s lunar lander lawsuit loss and get back to work
In a November 9th press conference, NASA leaders have begun to publicly celebrate the end of seven months of Blue Origin litigation and disruption to its Human Landing System (HLS). A federal court’s dismissal of that lawsuit means that the space agency can finally get back to work with SpaceX on its Starship Moon lander.
Following the failure of that lawsuit, NASA administrator Bill Nelson says that it will take the space agency some time to fully determine what and how much damage Blue Origin has caused. In the briefing, Nelson and associate administrators Kathy Lueders and Jim Free confirmed that Dynetics’ protest and Blue Origin’s protest and lawsuit have delayed SpaceX’s first crewed Starship Moon landing to no earlier than (NET) 2025.
Painfully, though, the briefing primarily focused on NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS) rocket and Orion spacecraft and the latest news about the system and the space agency’s attitude towards it are not encouraging.
Namely, exemplifying just how broken and deceptive NASA’s cost “transparency” is when it comes to SLS and Orion, the space agency used the briefing to announce its first updated Orion cost projections in more than half a decade. All the way back in September 2015, NASA announced major Orion delays and revealed that it had already spent $4.7B on the spacecraft and was committing another $6.7B through its first crewed launch – then scheduled no earlier than 2023.
That’s likely where NASA is getting its magically diminished Orion cost estimate. In reality, including Bush-era Constellation Program development that began in 2006, Orion will have cost NASA and the US taxpayer almost $22 billion by the end of 2021 and before a single full-up launch. Effectively doing the bare minimum to acknowledge a sanitized version of reality, NASA now says that Orion will cost at least $9.3 billion to its first crewed launch, which has been delayed to NET May 2024. It’s entirely unclear how NASA is calculating that deflated figure but in the six years since the space agency’s 2015 announcement that it would spend another $6.7B before Orion’s first crewed launch, it’s actually spent at least $8.4B and will have blown past the latest $9.3B target by mid-2022. Barring drastic funding cuts, Orion development will actually cost the US about $12.6B from 2016 to Artemis II and ~$25.8B since 2006 (not including inflation).
In an even starker demonstration of cognitive dissonance, when a New York Times reporter asked a hard question about the possibility of sidestepping Orion and SLS to get astronauts onto SpaceX’s Starship lunar lander, Administrator Nelson – having just repeatedly discussed Starship – fell back on an old boilerplate statement that “there’s only one rocket capable of doing this” – “this” being launching humans to the Moon and returning them to Earth and that “one rocket” being SLS. Association admin Jim Free also exhibited similar confusion, stating that “the architecture…just wouldn’t work.”
In reality, as currently contracted with NASA, SpaceX’s Starship Moon lander is a highly capable crewed spacecraft that will be refueled in Earth orbit before propelling itself to lunar orbit, where an SLS-launched Orion spacecraft would join it and transfer over three astronauts. Starship would then use its own propulsion to change orbits, land on the Moon, and eventually boost back into lunar orbit to transfer that crew back to Orion for the return to Earth. Nothing short of sheer ignorance – willful or not – could prevent competent spaceflight engineers or managers from understanding the possibilities such an architecture raises.
If NASA is already committed to human-rating Starship’s propulsion systems, which it is, it doesn’t take a grand leap of imagination to consider the possibility of adding a few more burns to Starship’s extremely complex concept of operations. If, for example, Starship has enough performance to return to Earth orbit from the lunar surface, it’s not hard to imagine NASA’s Artemis astronauts boarding Starship in Earth orbit after a far cheaper commercial launch and then returning to Earth orbit to debark Starship and return to that crew-rated reentry vehicle. As it turns out, NASA already has a highly successful crew-rated commercial rocket and spacecraft that’s already operational and likely more than 10 times cheaper than SLS/Orion.
While there are obvious challenges and uncertainties with such an option, the point is more that failing to even acknowledge the possibility of alternatives is a brutal appraisal of several of NASA’s most senior leaders and confirms that the politics of a jobs program like SLS/Orion is actively disrupting their ability to engage with reality and properly manage complex, risky programs.
Ultimately, it’s great news that SpaceX and NASA can finally get back to work on their Starship Moon lander plans. However, it’s also clearer than ever that SLS and Orion will remain a noose precariously balanced around the agency’s neck, forever threatening the Artemis Program and stifling NASA’s ability to seriously plan for – let alone publicly entertain or even acknowledge – contingencies or fresh ideas.
News
Tesla Sweden’s port deal sparks political clash in Trelleborg
The extension of Tesla’s lease has drawn criticism from the local Social Democratic opposition.
Tesla Sweden’s lease agreement at the Port of Trelleborg has triggered a political dispute, with local leaders divided over whether the municipally owned port should continue renting space to the electric vehicle maker amidst its ongoing conflict with the IF Metall union.
Tesla Sweden’s recently extended contract with the Port of Trelleborg has triggered calls for greater political oversight of future agreements.
Tesla has used the Port of Trelleborg to import vehicles into Sweden amid a blockade by the Transport Workers’ Union, as noted in a report from Dagens Arbete (DA). By routing cars via trucks on passenger ferries, the company has maintained deliveries despite the labor dispute. Vehicles have also been stored and prepared in facilities leased from the municipal port company.
The extension of Tesla’s lease has drawn criticism from the local Social Democratic opposition. Initially, the Port of Trelleborg hinted that it would not enter into new agreements with Tesla, but it eventually opted to renew its existing contract with the EV maker anyway.
Lennart Höckert, an opposition councilor, described the port’s decision as a “betrayal of the Swedish model,” arguing that a municipally owned entity should not appear to side with one party in an active labor dispute.
“If you want to protect the Swedish model, you shouldn’t get involved in a conflict and help one of the parties. When you as a company do this, it means that you are actually taking a position and making things worse in an already ongoing conflict,” Höckert said.
He added that the party now wants politicians to review and approve future rental agreements involving municipal properties at the port.
The proposal has been sharply criticized by Mathias Andersson of the Sweden Democrats, who chairs the municipal board. In comments to local media, Andersson described the Social Democrats’ approach as “Kim Jong Un-style,” arguing that political leaders should not micromanage a company governed by its own board.
“I believe that the port should be run like any other business,” Andersson said. He also noted that operational decisions fall under the authority of the Port of Trelleborg’s board instead of elected officials.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk’s X sees outage on Monday as users report issues
Monday’s outage follows a similar issue that befell the social media platform in mid-January.
X experienced an outage on Monday morning, with tens of thousands of users reporting that the platform failed to load across both desktop and mobile. The disruption began around 8:02 a.m. ET, as per Downdetector data, and quickly escalated in the U.S. and U.K.
Monday’s outage follows a similar issue that befell the social media platform in mid-January.
Shortly after 8 a.m. ET, Downdetector showed a sharp rise in incident reports. At one point, U.S. complaints exceeded 40,000, while U.K. reports climbed past 6,000. Earlier in the outage, filings had already crossed 11,000 in the U.S. and 3,300 in the U.K., as noted in a TechRadar report. X users in other locations, such as the Philippines and Costa Rica, also reported similar issues.
Users attempting to access X were met with a “something went wrong” message. Feeds did not refresh, posts failed to appear, and both the social media platform’s app and web versions appeared affected by the issue. The outage struck during peak weekday usage, amplifying its visibility across regions worldwide.
X has not issued an official explanation for the latest outage or confirmed what caused the service disruption. The scale of complaints drew comparisons to the platform’s major outage in November 2025, which resulted in users being met with “Internal server error / Error code 500” messages, as well as Cloudflare-related error notices.
The incident also comes just weeks after X experienced a similar downtime in mid-January. That outage seemed more notable, however, with more than 100,000 users reporting issues with the social media platform on Downdetector.
Elon Musk
New details emerge on The Boring Company’s Universal tunnel plans
The materials outline staffing, construction timelines, tunnel configuration, and operational details that were not previously public.
Newly released bidding documents have shed light on how Elon Musk’s Boring Company plans to connect Universal Orlando Resort’s north campus to Universal Epic Universe.
The materials outline staffing, construction timelines, tunnel configuration, and operational details that were not previously public about the planned Loop system.
The Shingle Creek Transit & Utility Community Development District voted Feb. 11 to begin contract negotiations with The Boring Company after ranking it the top bidder for the Universal Orlando transport project. Now, evaluation documents obtained by local news media reveal how the company intends to execute the project, according to Attraction Insight.
The proposal describes a twin-tunnel configuration, with one tunnel in each direction. It also noted that permitting, design, and construction could take roughly a year and a half once approvals are secured. The company indicated it could deploy multiple tunnel boring machines and install temporary support infrastructure, including muck storage pits and stormwater systems, during construction.
Bid documents list eight internal specialists assigned to the project, including tunnel engineers, structural engineers, and tunnel boring machine experts. Six subcontractors would handle fire protection, communications, soil treatment, and concrete work.
The company stated it “has the necessary internally produced tunneling equipment and personnel immediately available to complete this project for the district as quickly as permits and approvals can be obtained.”
Operationally, the system would mirror the company’s Las Vegas Loop model, using Tesla vehicles to provide point-to-point transport rather than fixed-route buses. The proposal frames the concept as “on-demand, express transportation,” with vehicles dispatched as needed and capacity adjustable in real time.
Stations could be built underground or above ground with ramp access into tunnels. The documents also referenced potential future integration of a configurable Robovan for passengers and cargo, though capacity projections for the Orlando tunnels have not yet been disclosed.
The proposal states that the Loop can integrate “easily into environmentally sensitive areas,” but it does not provide detailed mitigation plans for Central Florida’s high water table and limestone geology, which is susceptible to sinkholes. The company has stated that it intends to hire an Orlando-based geotechnical firm to evaluate soil conditions.
Tesla Sweden’s port deal sparks political clash in Trelleborg
Elon Musk’s X sees outage on Monday as users report issues
