News
SpaceX ready to begin training astronauts for first private spacewalk
Two members of the “Polaris Program” say that SpaceX could begin training private astronauts for the first private spacewalk in spaceflight history as early as May or June 2022.
Revealed earlier this year, the Polaris Program is a sort of hybridization of orbital spaceflight tourism and technology development and has one primary goal: to “rapidly advance human spaceflight capabilities.” Created in partnership with SpaceX by billionaire and Shift4 Payments founder Jared Isaacman, who also funded and flew on SpaceX’s first private Crew Dragon launch, Polaris aims to pick up where Inspiration4 left off last year.
While it will still be affiliated with and seek to help St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, the Polaris Program will focus on the development of several crucial technologies that SpaceX will need to accomplish its ultimate goal of spreading humanity throughout our solar system.
One of those crucial technologies is a cheap, reliable, and easy-to-use spacesuit that will allow future SpaceX astronauts to work outside of the safety of their spacecraft in the vacuum of space, and, one day, walk on the surfaces of other planets and moons. For Crew Dragon, SpaceX has already developed an ‘intra-vehicular activity’ or IVA pressure suit that all Dragon astronauts must wear during mission-critical maneuvers. In the event of capsule depressurization, the suits would be able to keep Dragon astronauts alive inside the capsule for at least a few days, supplying them with clean air and maintaining enough pressure to avoid altitude sickness (or worse).
However, because IVA suits generally prioritize unpressurized mobility, the astronauts inside them can do very little when the suits are fully pressurized. At sea level, every person on Earth is subjected to standard atmospheric pressure, which amounts to about 101 kilopascals or 14.5 pounds per square inch. In a spacesuit, the suit itself must maintain a pocket of air at similar pressures, ultimately meaning that the outer skin of a suit must resist the same force. To put that into context, even operating at the absolute minimum pressures that humans can realistically tolerate and use (4-6 psi), simply moving one’s arm in an IVA suit could require hundreds of pounds or kilograms of force.

Even in NASA’s aging extra-vehicular activity (EVA) spacesuits, which feature mechanical joints and other upgrades meant to make movement and life easier inside them, spacewalks are one of the most brutal and exhausting physical activities conceivable, requiring extraordinary levels of near-constant exertion for hours on end. According to comments made to Spaceflight Now by Jared Isaacman and by pilot Scott Poteet in an interview covered by AmericaSpace, SpaceX’s first EVA suit will be quite basic. To some extent, they will be heavily modified versions of SpaceX’s existing IVA suit design, but with much more advanced thermal management, an improved helmet/visor, and – most importantly – the addition of a number of mechanized joints.


As was the case with early NASA EVA suits developed in the 1960s, SpaceX’s first EVA suits will receive consumables, power, and communications through cables (tethers) that connect to Dragon’s life support. It will take SpaceX some time to develop a miniaturized, portable life support system as safe and capable as the packs used on NASA’s EVA suits. A tethered EVA suit will still allow SpaceX or private astronauts to perform EVAs and work on or inspect the exterior of their Crew Dragon or Starship spacecraft – capabilities that could save lives in certain emergency scenarios. SpaceX’s first priority, then, will be to make sure that the basics work well in space and that the suits actually allow astronauts to perform tasks that require good finger and limb dexterity without immediately exhausting themselves.
“You’re adding lots of redundancies in the suit that don’t exist today, since it’s more last line of defense,” Isaacman said, referring to the differences between SpaceX’s current suit and the new extravehicular spacesuit. “You have a new visor, new seals, then mobility, joints everywhere for increased mobility and dexterity in the fingers and such. I think, visually, it will be more along the lines of what it currently looks like, but very much like a new suit.”
Spaceflight Now – May 10th, 2022
The first of up to three Polaris missions – Polaris Dawn – is currently scheduled to launch as early as November 2022. All four private astronauts – made up of two Polaris employees and two SpaceX employees – will wear the new EVA suits in place of their usual IVA suits, while only two members of the crew will ultimately attempt to exit the capsule and perform a single EVA that could last roughly 30-90 minutes. To do so, the entire Dragon will be depressurized and one of two hatches opened will be opened, while the the other two EVA-suited astronauts will simply remain in their seats. Regardless of the outcome, it will be the first private spacewalk in the history of spaceflight.
The astronauts training to prepare for Polaris Dawn will focus heavily on the EVA, offering either the two chosen crew members or all four candidates an opportunity to experience deep-sea diving and test EVA suits both underwater and inside a Dragon capsule simulator.
Beyond supporting SpaceX’s EVA spacesuit development, Polaris Dawn’s crew will also conduct a range of science experiments, attempt to connect to high-speed internet in orbit through Starlink laser links, and even try to break the record for the highest Earth orbit reached by a crewed spacecraft (1400 km / 870 mi).
News
Elon Musk challenges Tesla credit rating from Moody’s after SpaceX gets a higher one
Elon Musk has publicly questioned Moody’s credit assessments following the rating agency’s decision to assign SpaceX a Baa1 investment-grade rating, two notches above Tesla’s Baa3. The comments came amid discussions comparing the two companies’ financial profiles.
SpaceX earned its first-time Baa1 rating with a stable outlook from Moody’s. The agency highlighted the company’s leadership in orbital launches, the growing recurring revenue from its Starlink satellite network, strong vertical integration, U.S. government contracts, and emerging opportunities in AI infrastructure.
These factors were cited as supporting robust cash flows, margin expansion, and financial flexibility.
Musk responded directly: “Tesla’s credit rating is ridiculously low tbh,” and added, “Yeah, makes no sense. Tesla has over $40B in cash, no debt, and is consistently profitable!” His remarks underscored Tesla’s balance sheet strength and profitability at a time when many traditional automakers continue to report losses in the shift to electric vehicles.
Yeah, makes no sense.
Tesla has over $40B in cash, no debt and is consistently profitable!
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 19, 2026
Tesla maintains a leading position in the global EV market, with diversification into energy and storage, battery technology, and robotics through projects like Optimus. Recent financial updates show the company generated positive free cash flow of $1.4 billion in Q1 2026, supported by operating cash flow of $3.9 billion. Cash and short-term investments stood at approximately $44.7 billion.
Moody’s has affirmed Tesla’s Baa3 issuer rating with a stable outlook in periodic reviews, acknowledging the company’s EV leadership, technology strengths, including AI for autonomous vehicles, solid profitability, and strong liquidity.
Tesla (TSLA) scores Baa3 Moody’s rating for ‘stable’ outlook
However, the agency has also noted challenges in the automotive segment and expectations for margin pressures.
Musk’s critique highlights a common debate about how traditional rating methodologies apply to high-growth, capital-intensive technology companies. SpaceX benefits from long-term government-backed contracts and diversified, recurring revenue streams, while Tesla’s valuation reflects heavy investment in future technologies such as autonomy and robotics.
Both ratings remain investment-grade, yet the one-notch difference has fueled online discussion about potential inconsistencies in evaluating innovative firms.
The exchange comes as SpaceX explores financing options following its recent valuation milestones, while Tesla continues executing on its multi-year roadmap. Musk’s pointed response serves as a reminder that credit ratings, though influential for borrowing costs, represent one lens through which markets assess corporate strength—and that company leaders often view their financial positions through the lens of long-term innovation and cash generation rather than short-term risk metrics alone.
News
Tesla faces Full Self-Driving pushback in EU over ‘speeding’
A new report from Reuters claims that a transport authority in Sweden is pushing back against the approval of Tesla’s Full Self-Driving suite because it will travel over speed limits.
The report says the Swedish Transport Administration (TRV) recommends the European Union votes against FSD’s approval. TRV believes it should not be approved until Tesla disables FSD’s ability to speed.
TRV sent a letter to the European Union’s Technical Committee on Motor Vehicles (TCMV), which is set to meet on June 30 to discuss the potential approval of the Tesla FSD suite in the country. Tesla, which has received various approvals in Europe over the past two months, has not provided a comment.
Teslas operating on FSD do travel over the speed limit, depending on the Speed Profile that is chosen. Drivers have the ability to disengage FSD at any point; Tesla specifically states that those supervising the suite are responsible for its actions.
Let’s cut to the chase: humans operating any vehicle speed almost daily in the United States. Realistically, speed limits in the U.S. are more frequently treated as speed minimums. However, other countries are different, and driving behaviors are less aggressive.
TRV believes that “allowing automated systems to systematically exceed legal speed limits…risks undermining both the legal framework and the expected safety benefits of vehicle automation,” the report stated. It’s surprising that Tesla has not received this claim from other countries previously.
This could be a good argument to bring Max Speed back, the setting that previously allowed the driver to choose the absolute fastest the car would travel.
This would still put the responsibility of supervision in the hands of the driver. It would allow the driver to choose whether the car would travel over the speed limit or not, acknowledging that they set the speed, and if they get pulled over, there would be no ability to argue it.
However, it does not seem as if this is something Tesla will do, especially considering many U.S. drivers have requested the feature in an effort to eliminate speeding or at least tone it down. The company has not shown any interest in bringing it back.
Tesla has approvals for FSD in Europe in Estonia, Lithuania, Denmark, the Netherlands, and Belgium.
Elon Musk
Tesla teases greater Grok FSD integration and ‘Banish’ feature ‘in about 3 months’
Tesla is going to let you guide Full Self-Driving with Grok in 3 months, CEO Elon Musk confirmed on X.
The response from Musk, which revealed Tesla plans to allow drivers to effectively control the car and its navigation more explicitly using Grok, puts the feature for about September.
A Tesla owner said that Full Self-Driving is great, but owners should be able to “converse with Grok like we can with an Uber driver.” She then used examples like, “Grok, turn right here,” and “Drop us off right here, we’ll walk due to traffic,” and finally,” Drop at entrance first, then park far away.”
Coincidentally, the final piece of dialogue would also mean features like Banish are potentially on the way soon.
This functionality will be there in about 3 months or so
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 18, 2026
Banish is also referred to as “Reverse Summon,” and would enable the car to self-park while dropping occupants off at their destination.
This would be a great way to improve the overall experience while supervising FSD. Navigation is already a major painpoint that many owners complain about. Manual overrides when a maneuver is requested or canceled (like using the turn signal stalk to override a navigation route), do not always work.
The feature could be especially useful in street parking scenarios in a city, where spots are sometimes tough to come by. Many of us who grab dinner in a more populated area will park a street or two over from wherever we’re going, because sometimes you know that’s the best you will get. If a driver using FSD could say, “Hey Grok, turn right here on Queen St. and park in that open spot on the right,” it could save a lot of confusion FSD might have on its own.
Musk teased that a similar feature was “coming” back in February:
Tesla Full Self-Driving set to get an awesome new feature, Elon Musk says
It is certainly surprising that Tesla is doing it at this point. The company’s more recent moves have been more evident of taking control and inputs away from humans and putting them in the AI’s hands more frequently. The biggest example of this was taking away Max Speed in AI4 cars, giving us Speed Profiles, and not having any input on the fastest speed the car will travel.
Of course, giving navigation preferences to Grok is availble already in Teslas, but not at the drop of a hat. Instead, you can suggest a certain route at the beginning of your drive.
Here’s an example of that from December:
🚨🏈 I am taking my parents and Fiancee to the @Ravens game next weekend and asked @Grok to help me route my @Tesla through a specific neighborhood to reach the correct Lot we will park in.
This is a great example of the new @grok nav integration with the Tesla Holiday Update: pic.twitter.com/rPp4I7q8Yv
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) December 13, 2025
Finally, the original post that Musk responded to mentioned a parking preference after dropping off the occupants, which describes the Banish feature that Tesla has teased for years.
We’re not sure if Musk was responding more to the ability to guide the car with Grok, or whether he also was including Banish in the three-month prediction timeframe.