News
SpaceX’s Starship to spar with Blue Origin for NASA Moon landing contracts
On November 18th, NASA announced that it had added commercial Moon lander offerings from SpaceX, Blue Origin, Sierra Nevada Corporation, and others to a pool of companies that will be able to compete to affordably deliver cargo to the surface of the Moon. With this latest addition of landers, competition could get very interesting, very quickly.
In November 2018, NASA revealed a big step forward in its plans to kickstart robotic exploration and utilization of the Moon, announcing nine new partners in its Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) initiative. Designed first and foremost to encourage the commercial development of unprecedentedly affordable Moon landers, the program’s first nine partners included Lockheed Martin, Astrobotic, Intuitive Machines, Masten Space, Orbit Beyond, and several others.
In May 2019, NASA announced the next step, contracting with three of those nine aforementioned providers to bring their proposed Moon landers to fruition and attempt their first lunar landings. Orbit Beyond dropped out shortly after but Astrobotic and Intuitive Machines continue to work towards that goal and aim to attempt the first Moon landings with their respective Peregrine and Nova-C spacecraft no earlier than (NET) July 2021. Intuitive Machines has contracted a SpaceX Falcon 9 for its first Nova-C Moon launch, while Astrobotic side with the very first launch of United Launch Alliance’s (ULA) next-generation Vulcan rocket.
Generally speaking, the landers offered by the first nine CLPS partners were on the smaller side of the spectrum, capable of delivering around 50-100 kg (100-200 lb) of useful cargo to the surface of the Moon with launch masses around 1500-3000 kg (3300-6600 lb). On November 18th, NASA announced that a second group of partners would be added to the competitive ‘pool’ of CLPS-eligible Moon landers, all of which can technically compete to land a range of NASA payloads on the Moon. The new five are Ceres Robotics, Tyvak Nano-Satellite Systems, Sierra Nevada Corporation, Blue Origin, and SpaceX.
Next to nothing is known about Tyvak’s or Ceres Robotics’ apparently proposed landers, but a render of SNC’s Moon lander concept shares some obvious similarities with its Dream Chaser spacecraft and expendable power and propulsion module, implying that it’s likely on the larger side. Blue Origin and SpaceX, of course, proposed their Blue Moon and Starship spacecraft.
As a 100%-speculative guess, Ceres and Tyvak’s landers are likely in the same ~100 kg-class range as the nine CLPS providers selected before it, while Sierra Nevada’s lander concept is probably closer to 500 kg (1100 lb). According to Blue Origin, it’s recently-updated Blue Moon lander is designed to deliver up to 4500 kg (9900 lb) to the lunar surface and is expected to attempt its first Moon landing no earlier than 2024.
Unsurprisingly, SpaceX’s Starship blows all 13 other lander proposals out of the water and, in the context of the CLPS program, is a bit like bringing a Gatling gun to a paintball match. According to SpaceX, a fully-refueled Starship should be able to land 100 metric tons (220,000 lb) of cargo on the Moon, although it’s unclear if that would allow the Starship to return to Earth.
In simpler terms, there is just no chance whatsoever that the practical scope of NASA’s CLPS program could possibly warrant more than a few metric tons delivered to the surface of the Moon. NASA as a whole doesn’t have the budget needed to build useful several-dozen-ton spacecraft or experiments, let alone CLPS. In that sense, the real question to ask is what could Starship manage if the useful payloads it needs to deliver are no more than a few metric tons?
Assuming SpaceX’s technical know-how is mature enough to allow Starship to preserve cryogenic propellant for weeks or months after launch, it’s entirely conceivable that a Moon launch with, say, 10 tons of cargo could be achieved with just one or two in-orbit refuelings, all while leaving that Starship enough margin to safely return to Earth. Given that NASA awarded Intuitive Machines and Astrobotic approximately $80M apiece to land 50-100 kg on the Moon, it’s far too easy to imagine SpaceX quoting a similar price to deliver 10+ tons to the Moon by enabling full Starship reuse.
All things considered, politics still looms in the distance and there is just as much of a chance that SpaceX (and maybe even Blue Origin) will be passed over by CLPS when the time comes to award the next round of Moon delivery contracts. Still, the odds of something far out of the ordinary happening are much higher with a program like CLPS. Stay tuned!
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
News
Tesla just made Service even easier and more convenient
The new feature is rolling out to iOS users now; we have not heard any confirmation from Android phone users whether they are receiving it too.
Tesla just made servicing your vehicle even easier and more convenient than it already is.
All it did was add a new section to its smartphone app.
Tesla has officially launched a new Maintenance tab that estimates the repair date and cost, and uses vehicle data to determine if any part is in need of replacement.
It can be found by accessing the app, going to Service, then hitting Request Service, and then Maintenance.
This can be accessed in your Tesla App by touching:
Service —> Request Service —> Maintenance https://t.co/WXrhm6KpZZ pic.twitter.com/xpFx4tHs3O
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 20, 2025
The new feature is rolling out to iOS users now; we have not heard any confirmation from Android phone users whether they are receiving it too. Since it is not a vehicle capability, we do not believe Tesla will delay the release of the feature to Android phones.
Teslas are already well known for having extremely low maintenance needs, and semi-annual check ups usually only require a tire rotation and some additional windshield washer fluid. There is not a need for things like oil changes or other things that are routinely needed on combustion engine cars due to the lack of parts.
Additionally, the small addition to the company’s smartphone app will help facilitate needs for Service, and could help relieve some congestion, while also streamlining the repair process for technicians.
Tesla to make app change for easier communication following Service
One of the biggest complaints about owning a Tesla is Service wait times, as availability can be extremely limited in some areas. However, Tesla has done a lot to work on increasing the number of Service centers it has, while also working hard to streamline service and make it less time-consuming.
Tesla has aimed to have an F1-style service experience, but it has not worked out that way. With that being said, there are significantly fewer complaints with Tesla’s Service division than in years past. With the presence of Mobile Technicians and more refined Service processes, things are definitely improving.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk hits back at former Tesla employee who disagrees with pay package
Tesla is worth more than all other automotive companies combined. Which of those CEOs would you like to run Tesla?
It won’t be me.
Elon Musk gave a tough response to a former Tesla employee who spoke out on X about the structure of the CEO’s pay package, arguing that it is an overpayment and would not generate enough shareholder value.
Without a doubt, the biggest issue on the bill at this year’s Tesla Shareholder Meeting in November is that of the pay package that was proposed to CEO Elon Musk.
As the Shareholder Meeting approaches, Tesla is urging those investors to vote in support of Musk’s pay package. So far, the community has been overwhelmingly supportive of giving Musk his massive payday, which could give him $1 trillion in additional holdings if he completes each of the outlined performance tranches.
However, there are a handful of institutional and individual shareholders who have pushed back against the package, either because of its value or because they feel it does not benefit shareholders enough.
Last week, we reported that Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS) advised voting against Tesla’s pay package for Musk. The firm said the payday would give Musk”extraordinarily high pay opportunities over the next ten years,” and it would “reduce the board’s ability to meaningfully adjust future pay levels.”
Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s $1 trillion pay package hits first adversity from proxy firm
Additionally, it called the value of the pay package “astronomical.”
On Saturday, a former Tesla employee said on X that Tesla’s proposed pay package for Musk would “barely beat inflation and it would underperform the S&P 500 considerably.” Additionally, he said:
“Sorry, Tesla, some of us (and supposedly, ISS too) simply don’t think that underperforming the S&P 500 this much is worth paying somebody 20 billion dollars worth of company value.
As a fan, I love Tesla, I want it to succeed. As a shareholder, I don’t want Tesla to over-pay for its CEO I strongly believe that the 2025 pay package proposal would over-pay for its CEO, and that other competent CEOs could grow Tesla just as much with way less political drama and cost investors much less that this proposal.”
Musk responded bluntly:
“Tesla is worth more than all other automotive companies combined. Which of those CEOs would you like to run Tesla? It won’t be me.”
Tesla is worth more than all other automotive companies combined. Which of those CEOs would you like to run Tesla?
It won’t be me.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) October 19, 2025
It seems the worry about Musk’s potential involvement in politics still looms to many, based on the responses to Musk’s post, which frequently mention that as a downside of his last year as Tesla CEO. However, Tesla’s Board confronted that directly.
In its proxy filing after announcing the pay package, Tesla said that it had three commitments, one of which was that the company would “receive assurances that Musk’s involvement with the political sphere would wind down in a timely manner.”
Tesla Board takes firm stance on Elon Musk’s political involvement in pay package proxy
Musk’s previous pay package was approved by shareholders twice, but it never made it to the CEO because of a lawsuit with the Delaware Chancery Court brought forth by a small-time shareholder.
The response from Musk does seem to show that if this time is no different, he will inevitably step down as CEO in the coming years.
Tesla rivals are lagging behind the company in alarming fashion in this crucial EV necessity: charging.
Tesla has had a long-standing reputation for having the most expansive electric vehicle charging infrastructure, and even as other companies have launched their own as part of the vehicle manufacturing, nobody seems to keep pace with the EV leader.
A report from Paren exhibited this trend in Q3, showing that Tesla overwhelmingly dominated EV charging stall installations over the past three months. This data is based on U.S. installations, where Tesla has long held a dominating position as the leader in overall electric vehicle sales for many years.
In Q3, Tesla installed 1,820 new chargers in the United States, bringing its total presence to 34,328, an all-time market share of 53.2 percent of all charging stalls in the country.
What’s alarming is the fact that all other networks — ChargePoint, Red E, Electrify America, EV Connect, EVgo, Ionna, Blink, Pilot Flying J, and Rivian Adventure — only installed 841 chargers collectively in Q3. That is nearly 1,000 units behind Tesla, despite there being nine companies contributing as competitors.
These nine networks have 10,055 stalls in total, the data from Paren shows, accounting for 15.6 percent of the chargers in the United States.
Tesla added more Superchargers in the US in Q3 than the next nine networks combined. pic.twitter.com/zihhezI6a6
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) October 20, 2025
EV charging is such a crucial part of the ownership experience, and also a part of the ongoing expansion of EV adoption in the United States.
As more people buy EVs and they become a more prominent form of passenger transportation, more chargers are needed. Many owners charge at home, but charging options in public are important to have for traveling, commuting, and for those who do not have access to residential charging.
With Tesla opening its Supercharger Network to the majority of EV brands over the past two years, things have gotten better.
It has been alarming to see so many companies involved in EV infrastructure essentially accept the gap between Tesla and themselves; not a single company has tried to up its pace to catch up to what Tesla has.
When it comes down to it, as long as there is charging, the manufacturer does not truly matter.
However, it would be nice to see Tesla have some competition in the space, but with its domination and head start in the infrastructure division, it seems the company will have this competitive advantage for years to come.
Tesla just made Service even easier and more convenient
Elon Musk hits back at former Tesla employee who disagrees with pay package
Tesla rivals are lagging behind alarmingly in this crucial EV necessity
-
Elon Musk4 days agoSpaceX posts Starship booster feat that’s so nutty, it doesn’t even look real
-
Elon Musk3 days agoTesla Full Self-Driving gets an offer to be insured for ‘almost free’
-
News3 days agoElon Musk confirms Tesla FSD V14.2 will see widespread rollout
-
News4 days agoTesla is adding an interesting feature to its centerscreen in a coming update
-
News6 days agoTesla launches new interior option for Model Y
-
News5 days agoTesla widens rollout of new Full Self-Driving suite to more owners
-
Elon Musk4 days agoTesla CEO Elon Musk’s $1 trillion pay package hits first adversity from proxy firm
-
News6 days agoTesla makes big move with its Insurance program