Connect with us

News

SpaceX, NASA celebrate Blue Origin’s lunar lander lawsuit loss and get back to work

Published

on

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.

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement
NASA’s first SLS core stage arrived in Florida almost seven months ago and is still at least 3-6 months away from launch. (Richard Angle)

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.

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

Tesla ships new feature that silences neighborhood Supercharger complaints

Published

on

tesla-diner-supercharger
Credit: Tesla

Tesla is shipping a new feature that silences neighborhood Supercharger complaints, prompting drivers to be aware of those who might be impacted by excessive noise nearby.

Tesla is now rolling out a new location-specific “Quiet Charging Zone” that prompts drivers to lower their vehicle’s audio volume in an effort to make things comfortable for everyone, even those who are not Tesla owners.

This is an impactful feature that will resolve many complaints from those who are living nearby.

When a Tesla plugs into this Supercharger and its media volume exceeds a certain level, the vehicle’s central touchscreen displays a polite notification: “Could you turn the volume down? Please be mindful of our neighbors.”

Accompanying the message is a prominent “Lower” button. One tap automatically reduces the audio to a more considerate level. Physical “Quiet Charging Zone” signs posted at the station reinforce the request, creating a cohesive experience that blends digital nudges with on-site reminders.

This feature highlights Tesla’s unique advantages. Unlike traditional automakers, Tesla owns both the vehicle software and the charging infrastructure.

Engineers can detect the precise location via GPS, trigger context-aware prompts, and deploy changes fleet-wide in hours or days without recalls or dealer visits. No public release notes highlighted the change, suggesting it was a quiet, site-specific rollout designed to test effectiveness before potential expansion.

These are usually referred to as “Undocumented Changes.”

Beyond immediate noise reduction, the initiative underscores Tesla’s customer- and community-focused ethos. While EVs are inherently quieter than combustion-engine vehicles, auxiliary behaviors like loud infotainment can still create friction in dense cities. Tesla’s rapid response turns potential conflict into an opportunity to demonstrate thoughtful engineering.

As Tesla expands its Supercharger network, which is now open to other EVs in many places, features like location-based quiet modes could become standard tools for harmonious integration into neighborhoods.

Continue Reading

News

Ferrari unveils its Luce EV, and its reception has been a disaster

Published

on

Credit: Ferrari

Ferrari unveiled its Luce EV over the weekend, and so far, its reception has been an absolute disaster, gathering negative reactions from a wide variety of people, including former executives.

The stock even took a hit on its first day of trading following the unveiling, dropping over 7 percent at one point.

Ferrari moving to EVs from its traditional V12s and mid-engine sports cars is a massive move. It was designed by Sir Jony Ive and Marc Newsom’s LoveFrom studio, which is known for design work for tech giant Apple. “Luce” means “light” in Italian, so Ferrari drew inspiration for its name from its sleek design, characterized by a smooth, sculpted body with rounded edges.

But its reception has been far from what Ferrari expected. The overall design has drawn some harsh criticism since its reveal, and it is simply stunning that such a storied company, with a rich history of beautiful, powerful cars has revealed a design that many are not a fan of.

Responses to the design were widely negative, with some saying, “Enzo is rolling in his grave,” and “This looks like a Nissan LEAF with a bad body kit.”

Former Ferrari Chairman Luca di Montezemolo said:

“If I said what I really think, I’d harm Ferrari. We’re risking the destruction of a myth, I’m very sorry about that. I hope they at least remove the Prancing Horse from that car.”

Ferrari has scaled back EV commitments in the past, primarily in response to weaker-than-expected demand for its electric powertrains.

Priced at roughly $640,000 in the U.S., it is tough to see how this car will ever truly live up to the massive expectations many had for it. It almost feels like, to a certain extent, Ferrari is looking for a way to get out of building EVs.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla unveils juicy new detail on the Roadster and hints at new unveil timeline

Published

on

A red Tesla Roadster driving around a turn
(Credit: Tesla)

Tesla unveiled a juicy new detail on the Roadster, its long-delayed supercar project, and additionally hinted at a new unveiling timeline, as it appears yet another month will pass without seeing the capabilities of the vehicle.

Vice President of Vehicle Engineering at Tesla, Lars Moravy, revealed on the Ride the Lightning podcast that the Roadster will be built at Gigafactory Texas, adding that “you’ll start to see a lot of things unfold in the next months.”

While we get a good detail on the plant of manufacture, we also get another letdown, as it appears the unveiling event will not take place in May, as CEO Elon Musk hinted during the Earnings Call.

The Roadster was first unveiled back in 2017, alongside the Semi, which entered production earlier this year. It was Tesla’s attempt at a true supercar; it would be rare, expensive, and lightning quick, among other incredible capabilities, like potentially hovering for a short period thanks to a collaboration project with SpaceX.

However, the vehicle was set to be delivered in 2020. Parts and supply chain issues due to the COVID-19 pandemic started these delays, and since then, Tesla, and specifically Musk, have wanted to push the capabilities of the Roadster to somewhere the human mind may not be able to currently comprehend.

Both Chief Designer Franz von Holzhausen and Moravy have said many things about the Roadster over the past few years, hinting that the car truly could be worth the wait. However, the continuous delays we’ve seen have undoubtedly been discouraging.

With that being said, it’s not like Tesla has been doing nothing. Instead, the company has been focusing on revamping current models, phasing out others, and working on developing the cars of the future, specifically, the Cybercab, which entered production at Giga Texas in April.

Despite the Roadster’s delays, there is still a ton of anticipation for the vehicle to be released. It will have a steering wheel, as Musk said it will be “the best of the last of the human-driven cars.”

Continue Reading