News
SpaceX has no plans to reuse Crew Dragon spaceships on NASA astronaut launches
According to program manager Kathy Lueders, SpaceX has chosen against reusing its upgraded Crew Dragon spaceships on NASA Commerical Crew Program (CCP) launches, even though NASA itself explicitly provided both CCP providers (Boeing and SpaceX) the option to propose reflights of crew capsules.
In fact, Boeing did just that with their CST-100 Starliner spacecraft, proposing to land Starliners on land (using airbags) and reuse the capsules repeatedly, up to 10 times each. While there is next to no official information on the matter, the question of what SpaceX is planning to do with its flight-proven Crew Dragon spacecraft is well worth puzzling over.
The Crew Dragon capsule for the SpaceX DM-1 mission will be launch ready by the end of September. pic.twitter.com/xsGw9fWkUG
— Michael Baylor (@MichaelBaylor_) August 27, 2018
The future of flight-proven Dragon 2s
Speaking at the most recent (August 27) NASA Advisory Council meeting, Lueders specifically stated that SpaceX had proposed “a new vehicle every time for [NASA]”, although NASA specifically provided the option for either new or reflown hardware, similar to Commercial Cargo where SpaceX already routinely reflies both Falcon 9s and Cargo Dragons on official NASA resupply missions.
The fact that SpaceX already routinely reuses Cargo Dragons – and even does so atop flight-proven Falcon 9 rocket boosters – adds additional intrigue to this seemingly odd decision. However, in the context of other near-term plans for other Dragon-related activities, SpaceX’s choice to not (at least in the near-term) refly Crew Dragon capsules for crewed NASA launches makes more than a little sense.
-
- DM-1 seen conducting acoustic testing in Ohio. (SpaceX)
-
- Falcon 9 B1051, DM-1’s rocket of choice, seen during construction in SpaceX’s Hawthorne factory. (SpaceX)
-
- (SpaceX)
-
- (SpaceX)
The single most obvious explanation can be found in SpaceX’s next Commercial Resupply Services contract (CRS-2), a similar follow-up to the CRS-1 contract SpaceX is currently launching Cargo Dragons under. Although SpaceX offered its Dragon 1 (already flying) as an option, NASA sided with Dragon 2 thanks to a number of unique and valuable capabilities offered by the upgraded craft. While no official detail has been released by NASA on the gritty specifics of those CRS-2 contracts, an April 2018 report from the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) offers a bit more insight into SpaceX’s plans.
Although the OIG report in question never specifically states it, some of the language used to describe Dragon 2’s cargo configuration does seem to imply that Cargo Dragon 2s will predominately (if not exclusively) be derived as slightly-modified Crew Dragon capsules, seemingly indicating that SpaceX’s CRS-2 missions may only ever launch flight-proven Crew Dragon capsules. Depending on the extent of the disassembly required to remove the components described below, all other “modifications” are essentially one-and-done after the software and additional designs are completed. As such, it should be relatively straightforward to modify the vehicles between Crew and Cargo configurations.
-
- An overview of the expected modifications needed to turn a Crew Dragon into a Cargo Dragon 2. (NASA OIG)
This strategy would make a lot of sense: by using its Commercial Crew contract as a means to fund the construction of brand new Crew Dragon capsules and Falcon 9 rockets and then using those once flight-proven rockets and spacecraft for other NASA cargo launches, general commercial missions, and maybe even low Earth orbit tourism, SpaceX can likely extract as much value and utility as possible from that hardware.
Despite the fact that NASA in this situation would effectively be carrying a significant portion of SpaceX’s non-BFR production-related capital expenditure, the company’s CRS-2 and Commercial Crew contracts place its cargo and crew launch costs far below those of competitors Boeing, Orbital ATK (now Northrop Grumman Innovation Systems), and Sierra Nevada. Overall, SpaceX’s launch costs to NASA range anywhere from 40-75% less than its three competitors’ best offerings, essentially invalidating any nitpicking over slight cost increases from CRS-1 to CRS-2.
Even if SpaceX never ends up reusing Crew Dragons on crewed NASA launches, NASA is still likely to benefit from lower costs derived by the partial modification and reuse of those same capsules and Falcon 9 boosters on CRS-2 cargo resupply missions.
For prompt updates, on-the-ground perspectives, and unique glimpses of SpaceX’s rocket recovery fleet check out our brand new LaunchPad and LandingZone newsletters!
Tesla’s Supercharger Diner in Los Angeles dominated the company’s global usage rankings after just one year, proving the concept is more than just a one-off novelty location that will fade away.
The performance could incite the company to build more locations, something that CEO Elon Musk has hinted at for some time.
Tesla’s Supercharger Diner delivered 21.2 GWh of energy in its first year of operation, the company’s head of Charging, Max de Zegher, revealed on X. Of the top 10 most utilized Supercharger locations in Tesla’s global infrastructure, the Diner in Los Angeles was the most used by drivers, and it wasn’t particularly close:
Tesla Diner opened exactly 1 year ago. Inspiring that futuristic places like this exist.
It’s our highest usage Supercharger in the world: 21.2 GWh delivered in a year, 1.6k sessions/day.
Top 10 Superchargers by energy delivered: https://t.co/9YvJ8lw696 pic.twitter.com/koB3AUJHws
— Max (@MdeZegher) July 21, 2026
On its launch day one year ago, nobody was too sure what the Tesla Diner would be about. It seemed like an interesting concept, and considering it had been in the works for years, it was a highly anticipated launch that many were looking forward to.
Based on its success, we could see additional Diners with Superchargers built throughout the United States, and potentially beyond. Musk has said on several occasions that the company would be willing to bring the Diner idea to more markets.
Tesla makes major change at Supercharger Diner amid epic demand
Of the markets that Musk has mentioned, both Palo Alto and Austin have come to be perceived as ideal selections. However, there are no concrete plans as of now to build new Supercharger Diners anywhere; the location on Santa Monica Boulevard will remain the exclusive spot to pick up Tesla-inspired eats, at least for the time being.
Tesla short sellers won big following the company’s massive fall on Wall Street after it reported subpar Earnings on Wednesday.
Tesla short sellers collected about $4.12 billion in single-day profits on Thursday, according to Bloomberg. Shares fell as much as 15 percent during Thursday’s session. It closed as one of the worst days for Tesla on Wall Street in the past three years.
Investors sold off the stock after Tesla said it would aggressively direct its spending toward AI and its Optimus robot project. The company had record revenues, which were driven by one of the strongest quarters in terms of vehicle deliveries in company history.
However, it missed EPS estimates by reporting just $0.33, a far cry from the $0.53 analysts expected.
S3 Partners reported that about 3 percent of Tesla’s outstanding stock is sold short. Managing Director at S3, Ihor Dusaniwsky, provided the short seller’s potential profit, as well as another figure: shorts have likely had paper gains of $8.92 billion this year, as Tesla shares are down 30 percent in 2026.
Tesla (TSLA) Q2 2026 earnings results: miss on EPS, beat on revenue
Tesla has burned short sellers many times in the past, but the company’s latest Earnings Call was a chance for those skeptics to taste some payback. Although the company gave some very transparent information regarding future projects, the rollout of Robotaxi, Optimus, and Semi, many investors took their profits on Thursday.
Notable short sellers like Michael Burry have been transparent about their skepticism around Tesla shares. Burry just revealed three weeks ago that he had opened up a new short on the stock, stating he shorted Tesla shares at $416.22. “Happy it jumped back to this level,” he said in a blog post.
At the time of publication, Tesla shares were down about 3 percent and the stock was trading at $309.92.
Tesla’s long-standing saga regarding its door handles and a manual release has entered its latest chapter, and as a result, a big change is coming.
On Friday, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) denied Tesla’s petition that was seeking a defect investigation into roughly 180,000 Model 3 vehicles for an issue involving the emergency mechanical door release.
🚨 The NHTSA denied a petition from Tesla that would have thrown out concerns regarding its door handles.
NHTSA said Tesla’s petition did not present evidence of a safety-related defect warranting an investigation. The agency said a rulemaking process would be a better strategy. pic.twitter.com/j6PzUBM1mT
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 24, 2026
NHTSA said that Tesla’s petition did not present evidence of a safety-related defect in the door handles or their emergency releases. Instead, the agency determined that it would rather solve the issue of the lack of labeling or location of emergency mechanical door releases and the federal safety rules that govern them.
Essentially, the NHTSA wants to create and enforce rules that would require automakers to make emergency door latch releases more clearly labeled in a car. Despite a Tesla having manual door releases on all four passenger doors, many people do not know they exist or how they work.
Tesla addresses door handle complaints with simple engineering fix
In recent times, Tesla has faced some criticism involving its door handles, specifically because some occupants have reported that they are unable to exit their vehicles after losing power. The door handles on a Tesla are electronically operated, but in the event that the 12V battery dies, there is a manual release that can be used.
The NHTSA only identified a single complaint involving the mechanical door releases: a 2022 Model 3 owner said the release was concealed and unlabeled after the vehicle lost power after a front-end collision. It has also already started to create a separate rulemaking process to make emergency door-egress systems more obvious.
It should be noted that all Teslas have mechanical emergency door releases, but they are placed in various locations as the vehicles have aged and been redesigned from year to year. Refer to the safety manual for your vehicle if you have any confusion about where the emergency releases are and how they work.
Tesla’s Supercharger Diner probably just secured more locations
Tesla short sellers win big after shares fall after earnings
