Connect with us

News

SpaceX’s Starship Moon lander passes NASA review alongside Blue Origin, Dynetics

Pictured on the left, SpaceX's lunar Starship is a customized version of the baseline ship meant to land NASA astronauts on the Moon. (SpaceX)

Published

on

A variant of SpaceX’s Starship spacecraft optimized to land NASA astronauts on the Moon has passed the space agency’s first review alongside competing teams lead by Blue Origin and Dynetics.

Aside from reiterating the fact that NASA is drawing heavily from its experience with the Commercial Crew Program (CCP), the completion of “certification baseline reviews” for Blue Origin, Dynetics, and SpaceX’s proposed lunar landers is a significant step forward for the Human Landing System (HLS) and Artemis programs. According to NASA’s official HLS “Broad Agency Announcement” or BAA, providers must submit a vast amount of paperwork and data to pass the certification baseline review (CBR).

NASA’s acceptance criteria for CBR documentation is about as general as the space agency gets, requiring providers to demonstrate at least a basic level of maturity and expertise. Like the name suggests, it sets a baseline from which NASA and SpaceX, Dynetics, and Blue Origin’s National Team will hone in on challenges and concerns specific to each system. SpaceX’s proposal is almost certainly unique, however, given that the company is the only one anywhere close to performing actual flight tests of a (relatively) similar system.

Pictured on the left, SpaceX’s lunar Starship is a customized version of the baseline ship meant to land NASA astronauts on the Moon. (SpaceX)

After much fanfare, NASA finally revealed its first real Human Landing System contracts on April 30th, 2020, awarding funds to Blue Origin, Dynetics, and SpaceX to develop three extremely dissimilar Moon landers. Designed to ferry NASA astronauts from a deserted lunar orbit (near-rectilinear halo orbit, NRHO). NASA initially refused to delineate the distribution of the $967 million contract.

A list of the HLS Certification Baseline Review (CBR) “acceptance criteria and products”. (NASA)

Several news outlets later reported that Blue Origin’s “National Team” (including Draper, Lockheed Martin, and Northrop Grumman) received $567 million to develop a complex three-stage system, using Blue Origin’s existing Blue Moon lander work for the final descent stage and lander. Dynetics won $253 million to build a slightly more familiar single-stage lander and SpaceX received $135 million for a single-stage Starship-derived vehicle.

The main goal of NASA’s initial funding is to extensively characterize and understand the capabilities and characteristics of each proposal and the likelihood that each vehicle will actually be ready to land humans on the Moon by the end of 2024. The next major HLS milestone will be what the space agency calls a “continuation review,” in which NASA will likely downselect to one of the three landers above. Administrator Jim Bridenstine says that NASA may decide to proceed with more than one provider but the strong implication is that only one will exit the ~December 2020 continuation review with future funding.

(SpaceX)
Unlike Blue Origin and Dynetics, SpaceX has already flight-tested multiple full-scale Starship prototypes. (SpaceX)

For SpaceX, it appears that the company will almost certainly field an orbit-capable Starship and Super Heavy booster with or without external help. At this point in the program, it would take a major upset for SpaceX not to be ready to start orbital Starship launch attempts in 2021. To an extent, SpaceX has proven through Falcon 9, Falcon Heavy, and Crew Dragon that it’s capable of developing reliable, reusable, industry-leading rockets and spacecraft several times more cheaply than its closest competitors.

To build a Starship safe and reliable enough that SpaceX can convince NASA to land astronauts on the Moon with it, the company will effectively have to prove that it can cut the cost of rocket production by another factor of five or ten. Time will tell where NASA’s HLS cards fall just a few months from now.

Advertisement

Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.

Eric Ralph is Teslarati's senior spaceflight reporter and has been covering the industry in some capacity for almost half a decade, largely spurred in 2016 by a trip to Mexico to watch Elon Musk reveal SpaceX's plans for Mars in person. Aside from spreading interest and excitement about spaceflight far and wide, his primary goal is to cover humanity's ongoing efforts to expand beyond Earth to the Moon, Mars, and elsewhere.

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

Tesla called ‘biggest meme stock we’ve ever seen’ by Yale associate dean

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA) is being called “the biggest meme stock we’ve ever seen” by Yale School of Management Senior Associate Dean Jeff Sonnenfeld, who made the comments in a recent interview with CNBC.

Sonnenfeld’s comments echo those of many of the company’s skeptics, who argue that its price-to-earnings ratio is far too high when compared to other companies also in the tech industry. Tesla is often compared to companies like Apple, Nvidia, and Microsoft when these types of discussions come up.

Fundamentally, yes, Tesla does trade at a P/E level that is significantly above that of any comparable company.

However, it is worth mentioning that Tesla is not traded like a typical company, either.

Here’s what Sonnenfeld said regarding Tesla:

“This is the biggest meme stock we’ve ever seen. Even at its peak, Amazon was nowhere near this level. The PE on this, well above 200, is just crazy. When you’ve got stocks like Nvidia, the price-earnings ratio is around 25 or 30, and Apple is maybe 35 or 36, Microsoft around the same. I mean, this is way out of line to be at a 220 PE. It’s crazy, and they’ve, I think, put a little too much emphasis on the magic wand of Musk.”

Many analysts have admitted in the past that they believe Tesla is an untraditional stock in the sense that many analysts trade it based on narrative and not fundamentals. Ryan Brinkman of J.P. Morgan once said:

“Tesla shares continue to strike us as having become completely divorced from the fundamentals.”

Dan Nathan, another notorious skeptic of Tesla shares, recently turned bullish on the stock because of “technicals and sentiment.” He said just last week:

“I think from a trading perspective, it looks very interesting.”

Nathan said Tesla shares show signs of strength moving forward, including holding its 200-day moving average and holding against current resistance levels.

Sonnenfeld’s synopsis of Tesla shares points out that there might be “a little too much emphasis on the magic wand of Musk.”

Elon Musk just bought $1 billion in Tesla stock, his biggest purchase ever

This could refer to different things: perhaps his recent $1 billion stock buy, which sent the stock skyrocketing, or the fact that many Tesla investors are fans and owners who do not buy and sell on numbers, but rather on news that Musk might report himself.

Tesla is trading around $423.76 at the time of publication, as of 3:25 p.m. on the East Coast.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla makes big change to Full Self-Driving doghouse that drivers will like

Now, it is changing the timeframe of which strikes will be removed, cutting it in half. The strikes will be removed every 3.5 days, as long as no strikes are received during the time period.

Published

on

tesla cabin facing camera
Tesla's Cabin-facing camera is used to monitor driver attentiveness. (Credit: Andy Slye/YouTube)

Tesla is making a big change to its Full Self-Driving doghouse that drivers will like.

The doghouse is a hypothetical term used to describe the penalty period that Tesla applies to drivers who receive too many infractions related to distracted driving.

Previously, Tesla implemented a seven-day ban on the use of Full Self-Driving for those who received five strikes in a vehicle equipped with a cabin camera and three strikes for those without a cabin camera.

It also forgave one strike per week of Full Self-Driving use, provided the driver did not receive any additional strikes during the seven-day period.

Now, it is changing the timeframe of which strikes will be removed, cutting it in half. The strikes will be removed every 3.5 days, as long as no strikes are received during the time period.

The change was found by Not a Tesla App, which noticed the adjustment in the Owner’s Manual for the 2025.32 Software Update.

The system undoubtedly helps improve safety as it helps keep drivers honest. However, there are definitely workarounds, which people are using and promoting for monetary gain, and you can find them on basically any online marketplace, including TikTok shop and Amazon:

People are marketing the product as an FSD cheat device, which the cabin-facing camera will not be able to detect, allowing you to watch something on a phone or look through the windshield at the road.

The safeguards implemented by Tesla are designed to protect drivers from distractions and also protect the company itself from liability. People are still using Full Self-Driving as if it were a fully autonomous product, and it is not.

Tesla even says that the driver must pay attention and be ready to take over in any scenario:

“Yes. Autopilot is a driver assistance system that is intended to be used only with a fully attentive driver. It does not turn a Tesla into a fully autonomous vehicle.

Before enabling Autopilot, you must agree to “keep your hands on the steering wheel at all times” and to always “maintain control and responsibility for your vehicle.” Once engaged, Autopilot will also deliver an escalating series of visual and audio warnings, reminding you to place your hands on the wheel if insufficient torque is applied or your vehicle otherwise detects you may not be attentive enough to the road ahead. If you repeatedly ignore these warnings, you will be locked out from using Autopilot during that trip.

You can override any of Autopilot’s features at any time by steering or applying the accelerator at any time.”

It is good that Tesla is rewarding those who learn from their mistakes with this shorter timeframe to lose the strikes. It won’t be needed forever, though, as eventually, the company will solve autonomy. The question is: when?

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Elon Musk teases the capabilities of the Tesla Roadster once again

Published

on

Elon Musk has once again teased the capabilities of the Tesla Roadster, fueling the anticipation that many have for the vehicle, despite it still having no public production or delivery date.

The Roadster is among the most anticipated vehicles in the automotive sector currently, and as Tesla has teased its capabilities, from a lightning-fast 1.1-second 0-60 MPH acceleration to potential hovering with cold-gas thrusters, people are eager to see it.

Although the design seemed to be finalized, there was still more work to be done. Earlier this year, as Tesla was showcasing some of the Roadster’s capabilities to Musk, he stated that it was capable of even more.

This pushed back its production date even further, much to the chagrin of those who have been waiting years for it.

Musk continues to tease us all, and as we sit here waiting hopelessly for it to be revealed, he said today that it is “something special beyond a car.”

Musk’s words were in response to a video posted by Tesla China, showing the Roadster in a new promotional video created by a fan.

The Roadster was planned to be released in 2020, but here we are in 2025, and there is still no sign of the vehicle entering production. However, Tesla did say earlier this year that it would host a demo event for the Roadster, where the company would showcase its capabilities.

Lars Moravy said earlier this year:

“Roadster is definitely in development. We did talk about it last Sunday night. We are gearing up for a super cool demo. It’s going to be mind-blowing; We showed Elon some cool demos last week of the tech we’ve been working on, and he got a little excited.”

Tesla exec gives big update on Roadster, confirming recent rumor

The delays have been attributed to “radically increased design goals” for the vehicle, which have, without a doubt, improved its capabilities, but at the same time, we just want to know if it’s ever going to come.

Tesla can always make it “better,” but at what point do you say, “Okay, it’s time to show this thing off.” They could always build another, even more capable supercar in the next ten years.

Continue Reading

Trending