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.
Tesla has entered an interesting situation with its Full Self-Driving suite in California, as the State’s Department of Motor Vehicles had adopted an order for a suspension of the company’s sales license, but it immediately put it on hold.
The company has been granted a reprieve as the DMV is giving Tesla an opportunity to “remedy the situation.” After the suspension was recommended for 30 days as a penalty, the DMV said it would give Tesla 90 days to allow the company to come into compliance.
The DMV is accusing Tesla of misleading consumers by using words like Autopilot and Full Self-Driving on its advanced driver assistance (ADAS) features.
The State’s DMV Director, Steve Gordon, said that he hoped “Tesla will find a way to get these misleading statements corrected.” However, Tesla responded to the story on Tuesday, stating that this was a “consumer protection” order for the company using the term Autopilot.
It said “not one single customer came forward to say there’s a problem.” It added that “sales in California will continue uninterrupted.”
This was a “consumer protection” order about the use of the term “Autopilot” in a case where not one single customer came forward to say there’s a problem.
Sales in California will continue uninterrupted.
— Tesla North America (@tesla_na) December 17, 2025
Tesla has used the terms Autopilot and Full Self-Driving for years, but has added the term “(Supervised)” to the end of the FSD suite, hoping to remedy some of the potential issues that regulators in various areas might have with the labeling of the program.
It might not be too long before Tesla stops catching flak for using the Full Self-Driving name to describe its platform.
Tesla Robotaxi goes driverless as Musk confirms Safety Monitor removal testing
The Robotaxi suite has continued to improve, and this week, vehicles were spotted in Austin without any occupants. CEO Elon Musk would later confirm that Tesla had started testing driverless rides in Austin, hoping to launch rides without any supervision by the end of the year.
Tesla stock (NASDAQ: TSLA) closed at an all-time high on Tuesday, jumping over 3 percent during the day and finishing at $489.88.
The price beats the previous record close, which was $479.86.
Shares have had a crazy year, dipping more than 40 percent from the start of the year. The stock then started to recover once again around late April, when its price started to climb back up from the low $200 level.
This week, Tesla started to climb toward its highest levels ever, as it was revealed on Sunday that the company was testing driverless Robotaxis in Austin. The spike in value pushed the company’s valuation to $1.63 trillion.
Tesla Robotaxi goes driverless as Musk confirms Safety Monitor removal testing
It is the seventh-most valuable company on the market currently, trailing Nvidia, Apple, Alphabet (Google), Microsoft, Amazon, and Meta.
Shares closed up $14.57 today, up over 3 percent.
The stock has gone through a lot this year, as previously mentioned. Shares tumbled in Q1 due to CEO Elon Musk’s involvement with the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which pulled his attention away from his companies and left a major overhang on their valuations.
However, things started to rebound halfway through the year, and as the government started to phase out the $7,500 tax credit, demand spiked as consumers tried to take advantage of it.
Q3 deliveries were the highest in company history, and Tesla responded to the loss of the tax credit with the launch of the Model 3 and Model Y Standard.
Additionally, analysts have announced high expectations this week for the company on Wall Street as Robotaxi continues to be the focus. With autonomy within Tesla’s sights, things are moving in the direction of Robotaxi being a major catalyst for growth on the Street in the coming year.
Elon Musk
Tesla needs to come through on this one Robotaxi metric, analyst says
“We think the key focus from here will be how fast Tesla can scale driverless operations (including if Tesla’s approach to software/hardware allows it to scale significantly faster than competitors, as the company has argued), and on profitability.”
Tesla needs to come through on this one Robotaxi metric, Mark Delaney of Goldman Sachs says.
Tesla is in the process of rolling out its Robotaxi platform to areas outside of Austin and the California Bay Area. It has plans to launch in five additional cities, including Houston, Dallas, Miami, Las Vegas, and Phoenix.
However, the company’s expansion is not what the focus needs to be, according to Delaney. It’s the speed of deployment.
The analyst said:
“We think the key focus from here will be how fast Tesla can scale driverless operations (including if Tesla’s approach to software/hardware allows it to scale significantly faster than competitors, as the company has argued), and on profitability.”
Profitability will come as the Robotaxi fleet expands. Making that money will be dependent on when Tesla can initiate rides in more areas, giving more customers access to the program.
There are some additional things that the company needs to make happen ahead of the major Robotaxi expansion, one of those things is launching driverless rides in Austin, the first city in which it launched the program.
This week, Tesla started testing driverless Robotaxi rides in Austin, as two different Model Y units were spotted with no occupants, a huge step in the company’s plans for the ride-sharing platform.
Tesla Robotaxi goes driverless as Musk confirms Safety Monitor removal testing
CEO Elon Musk has been hoping to remove Safety Monitors from Robotaxis in Austin for several months, first mentioning the plan to have them out by the end of 2025 in September. He confirmed on Sunday that Tesla had officially removed vehicle occupants and started testing truly unsupervised rides.
Although Safety Monitors in Austin have been sitting in the passenger’s seat, they have still had the ability to override things in case of an emergency. After all, the ultimate goal was safety and avoiding any accidents or injuries.
Goldman Sachs reiterated its ‘Neutral’ rating and its $400 price target. Delaney said, “Tesla is making progress with its autonomous technology,” and recent developments make it evident that this is true.
Tesla enters interesting situation with Full Self-Driving in California
Tesla stock closes at all-time high on heels of Robotaxi progress
