News
SpaceX’s Starship Moon lander under fire yet again as Blue Origin sues NASA
Less than three weeks after the US Government Accountability Office (GAO) categorically denied protests from Blue Origin and Dynetics over NASA’s decision to award SpaceX a Moon lander development contract, the former company has sued the space agency.
First reported by The Verge, Blue Origin filed its lawsuit against NASA with the US Court of Federal Claims on Monday, August 16th and continues to spout the same kind of rhetoric that GAO wholeheartedly refuted on July 30th. Namely, the office explicitly upheld the procurement process and reasoning behind NASA’s decision to award SpaceX – and SpaceX alone – a contract to develop a crewed Moon lander.
Thus far, the central argument put forth by Blue Origin and Dynetics is that NASA effectively invalidated the entire Human Landing System (HLS) “Option A” procurement when it didn’t award two HLS development contracts. Option A refers to a limited portion of the HLS program focused on funding the development of crewed Moon landers and the completion of two crucial flight tests – one uncrewed and one with NASA astronauts aboard.
Program-wise, HLS is quite similar to NASA’s Commercial Crew Program (CCP), which began as a series of smaller contracts focused on capability demonstrations that culminated in a major competition to ferry NASA astronauts to and from the International Space Station (ISS). Ultimately, NASA selected Boeing and SpaceX and the rest is now history (SpaceX flourished; Boeing floundered) and despite unsurprising delays, the program has been an extraordinary success and a financial bargain.
As part of the major Commercial Crew Transportation Capability contracts SpaceX and Boeing won, both companies were tasked with designed, building, and qualifying crewed spacecraft to NASA specifications. The centerpiece of those contracts was a pair of full-up demonstration flights to and from the ISS – one uncrewed and the other with two NASA astronauts. NASA then separately purchased “post-certification missions” – operational crew transport flights – from both companies a few years into development.
The corollaries between Commercial Crew and HLS are clear and unsurprising. However, unlike the Commercial Crew Program, NASA has been able to structure HLS with the benefits of hindsight. This time around, already faced with a Congressional funding shortfall even worse than years of half-funding that directly delayed CCtCap, NASA used a different procurement ‘vessel’ for HLS and repeatedly warned competitors that while it wanted two Moon lander providers, the ability to award two contracts would be entirely dependent on funding availability.
In other words, NASA had learned an important lesson from the Commercial Crew Program and wasn’t about to trap itself with contractual obligations that far outmatched recent Congressional funding trends. Intentionally or not, NASA structured HLS in such a way that it only awarded major Option A lander contracts after Congress had already appropriated its FY2021 funding. As it turned out, Congress ultimately provided a pathetic 25% of the full $3.4 billion NASA had requested, leaving the agency no choice but to downselect to just a single provider – SpaceX. Put simply, NASA has assumed that Congress will continue to supply just a tiny fraction of the funding it would need to develop two landers on time and SpaceX’s Starship proposal was just cheap enough to make any Option A award possible.
The fixed-price contract will cost NASA $2.9B over four or so years – narrowly within the space agency’s reach if Congress continues to appropriate around $850M annually ($3.4B over four years). The numbers are very simple. As GAO notes, the Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) vehicle NASA used for its HLS Option A procurement also strictly allows the agency to select as many or as few proposals as it wants, including none at all. In the lead-up to proposal submission, official NASA documents repeatedly cautioned as much, warning that the agency might not even award one contract depending on funding or the quality of proposals it received.
For Blue Origin’s lawsuit to succeed, the increasingly desperate company will have to convince a federal judge that basic realities and longstanding precedents of federal procurement – not just NASA’s HLS award to SpaceX – are flawed and need to be changed. The odds of success are thus spectacularly low. However, if the presiding judge allows the case to proceed and awards Blue Origin an injunction against NASA, it could force the space agency to cease work on SpaceX’s HLS contract for months and potentially freeze SpaceX’s access to the $300M NASA recently disbursed.
News
Tesla is not sparing any expense in ensuring the Cybercab is safe
Images shared by the longtime watcher showed 16 Cybercab prototypes parked near Giga Texas’ dedicated crash test facility.
The Tesla Cybercab could very well be the safest taxi on the road when it is released and deployed for public use. This was, at least, hinted at by the intensive safety tests that Tesla seems to be putting the autonomous two-seater through at its Giga Texas crash test facility.
Intensive crash tests
As per recent images from longtime Giga Texas watcher and drone operator Joe Tegtmeyer, Tesla seems to be very busy crash testing Cybercab units. Images shared by the longtime watcher showed 16 Cybercab prototypes parked near Giga Texas’ dedicated crash test facility just before the holidays.
Tegtmeyer’s aerial photos showed the prototypes clustered outside the factory’s testing building. Some uncovered Cybercabs showed notable damage and one even had its airbags engaged. With Cybercab production expected to start in about 130 days, it appears that Tesla is very busy ensuring that its autonomous two-seater ends up becoming the safest taxi on public roads.
Prioritizing safety
With no human driver controls, the Cybercab demands exceptional active and passive safety systems to protect occupants in any scenario. Considering Tesla’s reputation, it is then understandable that the company seems to be sparing no expense in ensuring that the Cybercab is as safe as possible.
Tesla’s focus on safety was recently highlighted when the Cybertruck achieved a Top Safety Pick+ rating from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS). This was a notable victory for the Cybertruck as critics have long claimed that the vehicle will be one of, if not the, most unsafe truck on the road due to its appearance. The vehicle’s Top Safety Pick+ rating, if any, simply proved that Tesla never neglects to make its cars as safe as possible, and that definitely includes the Cybercab.
Elon Musk
Tesla’s Elon Musk gives timeframe for FSD’s release in UAE
Provided that Musk’s timeframe proves accurate, FSD would be able to start saturating the Middle East, starting with the UAE, next year.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk stated on Monday that Full Self-Driving (Supervised) could launch in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) as soon as January 2026.
Provided that Musk’s timeframe proves accurate, FSD would be able to start saturating the Middle East, starting with the UAE, next year.
Musk’s estimate
In a post on X, UAE-based political analyst Ahmed Sharif Al Amiri asked Musk when FSD would arrive in the country, quoting an earlier post where the CEO encouraged users to try out FSD for themselves. Musk responded directly to the analyst’s inquiry.
“Hopefully, next month,” Musk wrote. The exchange attracted a lot of attention, with numerous X users sharing their excitement at the idea of FSD being brought to a new country. FSD (Supervised), after all, would likely allow hands-off highway driving, urban navigation, and parking under driver oversight in traffic-heavy cities such as Dubai and Abu Dhabi.
Musk’s comments about FSD’s arrival in the UAE were posted following his visit to the Middle Eastern country. Over the weekend, images were shared online of Musk meeting with UAE Defense Minister, Deputy Prime Minister, and Dubai Crown Prince HH Sheikh Hamdan bin Mohammed. Musk also posted a supportive message about the country, posting “UAE rocks!” on X.
FSD recognition
FSD has been getting quite a lot of support from foreign media outlets. FSD (Supervised) earned high marks from Germany’s largest car magazine, Auto Bild, during a test in Berlin’s challenging urban environment. The demonstration highlighted the system’s ability to handle dense traffic, construction sites, pedestrian crossings, and narrow streets with smooth, confident decision-making.
Journalist Robin Hornig was particularly struck by FSD’s superior perception and tireless attention, stating: “Tesla FSD Supervised sees more than I do. It doesn’t get distracted and never gets tired. I like to think I’m a good driver, but I can’t match this system’s all-around vision. It’s at its best when both work together: my experience and the Tesla’s constant attention.” Only one intervention was needed when the system misread a route, showcasing its maturity while relying on vision-only sensors and over-the-air learning.
News
Tesla quietly flexes FSD’s reliability amid Waymo blackout in San Francisco
“Tesla Robotaxis were unaffected by the SF power outage,” Musk wrote in his post.
Tesla highlighted its Full Self-Driving (Supervised) system’s robustness this week by sharing dashcam footage of a vehicle in FSD navigating pitch-black San Francisco streets during the city’s widespread power outage.
While Waymo’s robotaxis stalled and caused traffic jams, Tesla’s vision-only approach kept operating seamlessly without remote intervention. Elon Musk amplified the clip, highlighting the contrast between the two systems.
Tesla FSD handles total darkness
The @Tesla_AI account posted a video from a Model Y operating on FSD during San Francisco’s blackout. As could be seen in the video, streetlights, traffic signals, and surrounding illumination were completely out, but the vehicle drove confidently and cautiously, just like a proficient human driver.
Musk reposted the clip, adding context to reports of Waymo vehicles struggling in the same conditions. “Tesla Robotaxis were unaffected by the SF power outage,” Musk wrote in his post.
Musk and the Tesla AI team’s posts highlight the idea that FSD operates a lot like any experienced human driver. Since the system does not rely on a variety of sensors and a complicated symphony of factors, vehicles could technically navigate challenging circumstances as they emerge. This definitely seemed to be the case in San Francisco.
Waymo’s blackout struggles
Waymo faced scrutiny after multiple self-driving Jaguar I-PACE taxis stopped functioning during the blackout, blocking lanes, causing traffic jams, and requiring manual retrieval. Videos shared during the power outage showed fleets of Waymo vehicles just stopping in the middle of the road, seemingly confused about what to do when the lights go out.
In a comment, Waymo stated that its vehicles treat nonfunctional signals as four-way stops, but “the sheer scale of the outage led to instances where vehicles remained stationary longer than usual to confirm the state of the affected intersections. This contributed to traffic friction during the height of the congestion.”
A company spokesperson also shared some thoughts about the incidents. “Yesterday’s power outage was a widespread event that caused gridlock across San Francisco, with non-functioning traffic signals and transit disruptions. While the failure of the utility infrastructure was significant, we are committed to ensuring our technology adjusts to traffic flow during such events,” the Waymo spokesperson stated, adding that it is “focused on rapidly integrating the lessons learned from this event, and are committed to earning and maintaining the trust of the communities we serve every day.”
Tesla is not sparing any expense in ensuring the Cybercab is safe
Tesla’s Elon Musk gives timeframe for FSD’s release in UAE
