News
SpaceX and “new space” up against traditionalists for future of NASA
Speculation about the direction of NASA under the Trump Administration has been circling for weeks, and although there are still no definite answers, there’s finally some news about the process being executed.
According to internal White House advisory documents obtained by Politico, there’s a huge push from many advisors for NASA to be used as a driver for privatized space technology; however, that push is bringing the rift between traditional NASA contractors and the “new space” companies like SpaceX and Blue Origin to a head. NASA’s $19 billion dollar budget is simply not large enough to accommodate both commercially-driven and traditional visions for the agency. The struggle is real, apparently, and it isn’t just affecting inner White House circles, either.
Earlier this week, the Commercial Spaceflight Federation (CSF) surprised its audience by endorsing NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS), the heavy lift rocket being built to launch future NASA missions. In his remarks at the FAA’s Commercial Space Conference, CSF chairman Alan Stern characterized the SLS as a “resource” that could be complimentary to commercial space activity.
The surprise at this announcement comes in part from the fact that Boeing, a traditional NASA contractor and one-half of the government-customer-only launch service United Launch Alliance (ULA), is the prime contractor for the SLS. The cost comparison between private and government contracted technology is the issue.
Cost Effectiveness is Key
The billions of dollars it will take to fully develop SLS plus the high cost of launch missions is hard to justify when, for example, SpaceX estimates under $100 million dollars per flight on its upcoming heavy launch vehicle, Falcon Heavy.
SLS is estimated to be capable of carrying many times the payload weight of SpaceX’s vehicle, but it would still cost much less to use multiple SpaceX vehicles for a multi-part payload rather than justify the huge cost for a single launch. That, or one could argue that the cost of a SpaceX or Blue Origin developed vehicle in line with the SLS’s capabilities would be much more cost effective given the pricing record thus far. It also should be noted that such vehicles are, in fact, being designed by these companies already, albeit mostly still in non-tangible state. SpaceX has its Mars-bound Interplanetary Transport System (or “BFR” if you like), and Blue Origin has its “New Armstrong” in the works.
What about Congress?
The push from White House advisers will face obstacles in Congress as well. Space subcommittee members in both the House and Senate have discussed some of the details included in a draft 2017 NASA Authorization Act, the legislation which will define NASA’s priorities, and considering their comments alongside prior legislative drafts, “stay the course” looks to be the general direction. Concern over NASA’s need for “constancy of purpose” is a big driver, as missions requiring long-term development suffer when directives vary too widely from one presidential administration to another.
While prior presentations of NASA Authorization Acts have been lengthy and mostly inviting little to no controversy, they all still contain a requirement to use the SLS and Orion, NASA’s crew capsule under development, for deep space activity and anywhere else suitable. Such emphasis would likely clash with those advocating for transforming NASA’s role to one supporting commercial launch vehicles, especially those promoting the elimination of the SLS entirely.
Also, with thousands of NASA-dependent jobs on the line in the districts hosting SLS development facilities, the stakes are high for any congressional representatives thinking of supporting major shifts for NASA. The lines seem to have been drawn in the proverbial sand.
What about Mars?
News of commercial space supporters advocating for a NASA transition inside the White House may sound hopeful to those rooting for more privatized space technology; however, for colonization dreamers, Mars looks to be a carrot teased at the end of a “Moon first” road. The internal White House documents call for Moon development to begin by 2020, Mars falling under the “and beyond” category of capabilities that could be possible with an overhauled NASA.
In that light, the proposed NASA bills might sound like a Cinderella story for Mars enthusiasts: In order to go to the Prince’s ball (Mars), a whole host of lengthy chores (cis-lunar activity, Moon base, use the SLS, etc.) must be completed first.
If “Moon first” becomes the winner in the end, it still wouldn’t likely interfere with Elon Musk’s Mars plans but rather help them along with all the new space infrastructure launch income for SpaceX. And to continue with the Cinderella bit, we know there’s no way Musk would make it home by midnight anyway, although he does seem to have an affinity for mice.
News
Tesla launches new Model 3 financing deal with awesome savings
Tesla is now offering a 0.99% APR financing option for all new Model 3 orders in the United States, and it applies to all loan terms of up to 72 months.
Tesla has launched a new Model 3 financing deal in the United States that brings awesome savings. The deal looks to move more of the company’s mass-market sedan as it is the second-most popular vehicle Tesla offers, behind its sibling, the Model Y.
Tesla is now offering a 0.99% APR financing option for all new Model 3 orders in the United States, and it applies to all loan terms of up to 72 months.
It includes three Model 3 configurations, including the Model 3 Performance. The rate applies to:
- Model 3 Premium Rear-Wheel-Drive
- Model 3 Premium All-Wheel-Drive
- Model 3 Performance
The previous APR offer was 2.99%.
NEWS: Tesla has introduced 0.99% APR financing for all new Model 3 orders in the U.S. (applies to loan terms of up to 72 months).
This includes:
• Model 3 RWD
• Model 3 Premium RWD
• Model 3 Premium AWD
• Model 3 PerformanceTesla was previously offering 2.99% APR. pic.twitter.com/A1ZS25C9gM
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) February 15, 2026
Tesla routinely utilizes low-interest offers to help move vehicles, especially as the rates can help get people to payments that are more comfortable with their monthly budgets. Along with other savings, like those on maintenance and gas, this is another way Tesla pushes savings to customers.
The company had offered a similar program in China on the Model 3 and Model Y vehicles, but it had ended on January 31.
The Model 3 was the second-best-selling electric vehicle in the United States in 2025, trailing only the Model Y. According to automotive data provided by Cox, Tesla sold 192,440 units last year of the all-electric sedan. The Model Y sold 357,528 units.
News
Tesla hasn’t adopted Apple CarPlay yet for this shocking reason
Many Apple and iPhone users have wanted the addition, especially to utilize third-party Navigation apps like Waze, which is a popular alternative. Getting apps outside of Tesla’s Navigation to work with its Full Self-Driving suite seems to be a potential issue the company will have to work through as well.
Perhaps one of the most requested features for Tesla vehicles by owners is the addition of Apple CarPlay. It sounds like the company wants to bring the popular UI to its cars, but there are a few bottlenecks preventing it from doing so.
The biggest reason why CarPlay has not made its way to Teslas yet might shock you.
According to Bloomberg‘s Mark Gurman, Tesla is still working on bringing CarPlay to its vehicles. There are two primary reasons why Tesla has not done it quite yet: App compatibility issues and, most importantly, there are incredibly low adoption rates of iOS 26.
Tesla’s Apple CarPlay ambitions are not dead, they’re still in the works
iOS 26 is Apple’s most recent software version, which was released back in September 2025. It introduced a major redesign to the overall operating system, especially its aesthetic, with the rollout of “Liquid Glass.”
However, despite the many changes and updates, Apple users have not been too keen on the iOS 26 update, and the low adoption rates have been a major sticking point for Tesla as it looks to develop a potential alternative for its in-house UI.
It was first rumored that Tesla was planning to bring CarPlay out in its cars late last year. Many Apple and iPhone users have wanted the addition, especially to utilize third-party Navigation apps like Waze, which is a popular alternative. Getting apps outside of Tesla’s Navigation to work with its Full Self-Driving suite seems to be a potential issue the company will have to work through as well.
According to the report, Tesla asked Apple to make some changes to improve compatibility between its software and Apple Maps:
“Tesla asked Apple to make engineering changes to Maps to improve compatibility. The iPhone maker agreed and implemented the adjustments in a bug fix update to iOS 26 and the latest version of CarPlay.”
Gurman also said that there were some issues with turn-by-turn guidance from Tesla’s maps app, and it did not properly sync up with Apple Maps during FSD operation. This is something that needs to be resolved before it is rolled out.
There is no listed launch date, nor has there been any coding revealed that would indicate Apple CarPlay is close to being launched within Tesla vehicles.
Elon Musk
Starlink restrictions are hitting Russian battlefield comms: report
The restrictions have reportedly disrupted Moscow’s drone coordination and frontline communications.
SpaceX’s decision to disable unauthorized Starlink terminals in Ukraine is now being felt on the battlefield, with Ukrainian commanders reporting that Russian troops have struggled to maintain assault operations without access to the satellite network.
The restrictions have reportedly disrupted Moscow’s drone coordination and frontline communications.
Lt. Denis Yaroslavsky, who commands a special reconnaissance unit, stated that Russian assault activity noticeably declined for several days after the shutdown. “For three to four days after the shutdown, they really reduced the assault operations,” Yaroslavsky said.
Russian units had allegedly obtained Starlink terminals through black market channels and mounted them on drones and weapons systems, despite service terms prohibiting offensive military use. Once those terminals were blocked, commanders on the Ukrainian side reported improved battlefield ratios, as noted in a New York Post report.
A Ukrainian unit commander stated that casualty imbalances widened after the cutoff. “On any given day, depending on your scale of analysis, my sector was already achieving 20:1 (casuality rate) before the shutdown, and we are an elite unit. Regular units have no problem going 5:1 or 8:1. With Starlink down, 13:1 (casualty rate) for a regular unit is easy,” the unit commander said.
The restrictions come as Russia faces heavy challenges across multiple fronts. A late January report from the Center for Strategic and International Studies estimated that more than 1.2 million Russian troops have been killed, wounded, or gone missing since February 2022.
The Washington-based Institute for the Study of War also noted that activity from Russia’s Rubikon drone unit declined after Feb. 1, suggesting communications constraints from Starlink’s restrictions may be limiting operations. “I’m sure the Russians have (alternative options), but it takes time to maximize their implementation and this (would take) at least four to six months,” Yaroslavsky noted.
Tesla launches new Model 3 financing deal with awesome savings
Tesla hasn’t adopted Apple CarPlay yet for this shocking reason
