Connect with us

News

SpaceX’s upgraded Starship set for test flight despite sore NASA contract losers

Sore losers have potentially delay NASA's ability to work on SpaceX's HLS Moon lander contract but the company isn't letting the red tape stop it from making progress. (Dynetics/SpaceX/bocachicagal/Blue Origin)

Published

5 years ago

on

Within the last week, while SpaceX has been diligently working to ready an upgraded Starship prototype for its first launch, former competitors Blue Origin and Dynetics – both of which recently lost a historic NASA Moon lander contract to SpaceX – have filed “protests” and forced the space agency to freeze work (and funds).

That means that NASA is now legally unable to use funds or resources related to its Human Lander System (HLS) program or the $2.9 billion contract it awarded SpaceX on April 16th to develop a variant of Starship to return humanity to the Moon. However, just like SpaceX has already spent a great deal of its own time and money on Starship development and – more recently – a rapid-fire series of launches, the company appears to have no intention of letting sore losers hamper its rocket factory or test campaign.

https://twitter.com/CaseyDreier/status/1388232161921093634

Instead, on the same two days Blue Origin and Dynetics loudly filed official protests with the US Government Accountability Office (GAO), SpaceX performed two back-to-back static fire tests with a Starship prototype and Raptor engines outfitted with “hundreds of improvements.” Technical challenges and unsavory weather conditions forced SpaceX to call off a launch planned sometime last week but the company now appears to be on track to launch Starship prototype SN15 as early as Tuesday, May 4th.

In principle, the ability for companies to protest US government contracting decisions is a necessity and (nominally) a net good but it can easily be misused – and often in damaging ways. In the case of Blue Origin and Dynetics, it’s difficult not to perceive both protests as examples of the latter.

Advertisement

Blue Origin effectively disagrees with every single major point made and conclusion drawn by NASA’s Source Selection Authority (Kathy Lueders) and a separate panel of experts – often to the point that the company is strongly implying that it understands NASA’s contracting process better than the space agency itself. Blue Origin partners Northrop Grumman and Lockheed Martin are both partially or fully responsible for several of their own catastrophic acquisition boondoggles (F-35, Orion, SLS, James Webb Space Telescope, etc.) and are part of the military-industrial complex primarily responsible for turning US military and aerospace procurement into the quagmire of political interests, quasi-monopolies, and loopholes it is today.

The primary argument is generally shared by both protestors. In essence, Dynetics [p. 23; PDF] and Blue Origin [PDF] believe that it was unfair or improper for NASA to select just a single provider from the three companies or groups that competed. They argue that downselecting to one provider in lieu of budget shortfalls changed the procurement process and competition so much that NASA should have effectively called it quits and restarted the entire five-month process. Blue Origin and Dynetics also both imply that they were somehow blindsided by NASA’s concerns about a Congressional funding shortfall.

In reality, NASA could scarcely have been clearer that it was exceptionally sensitive about HLS funding and extremely motivated to attempt to return humans to the Moon by 2024 with or without the full support of Congress – albeit in fewer words. As Lueders herself noted in the HLS Option A award selection statement, the solicitation Blue, Dynetics, and SpaceX responded to states – word for word – that “the overall number of awards will be dependent upon funding availability and evaluation results.”

Additionally, implications that NASA somehow blindsided offerors with its lack of funding are woefully ignorant at best and consciously disingenuous at worse. Anyone with even the slightest awareness of the history of large-scale NASA programs would know that the space agency’s budget is all but exclusively determined by Congress each year and liable to change just as frequently if political winds shift. Short of blackmailing members of Congress or wistfully hoping that other avenues of legal political influence and partnership actually lead to desired funding and priorities appearing in appropriations legislation, NASA knows the future of its budget about as well as anyone else with access to the internet and a rudimentary awareness of history and current events.

Advertisement

It became clear that Congress was likely to drastically underfund NASA’s HLS program as early as November 2020 – weeks before HLS Option A proposals were due. The latest appropriations bill was passed on January 3rd, 2021, providing NASA $850 million of the ~$3.4 billion it requested for HLS. Historically, NASA’s experience with the Commercial Crew Program – public knowledge available to anyone – likely made it clear to the agency that it could not trust Congress to fund its priorities in good faith when half a decade of drastic underfunding ultimately delayed the critical program by several years. That damage was done by merely halving NASA Commercial Crew budget request from 2010 to 2013, whereas Congress had already set itself on a path to provide barely a quarter of the HLS funds NASA asked for in the weeks before Moon lander proposals were due.

Ultimately, the protests filed by Blue Origin and Dynetics are packed to the brim with petty axe-grinding, attempts to paint SpaceX in a negative light, and a general lack of indication that either company is operating in good faith. Instead, their protests appear all but guaranteed to fail while simultaneously forcing NASA to freeze HLS work and delay related disbursements for up to 100 days. Given that SpaceX is now technically working to design, build, qualify, and fly an uncrewed Lunar Starship prototype by 2023 and a crewed demonstration landing by 2024, 100 days represents a full 7-10% of the time that’s available to complete that extraordinary task.

Ironically, the protests made by Blue Origin and Dynetics have already helped demonstrate why NASA’s decision – especially in light of unambiguous budgetary restrictions – to sole-source its HLS Moon lander contract to SpaceX was an astute one. Had a victorious Blue Origin or Dynetics been in a similar position to SpaceX, it’s almost impossible to imagine either team continuing work to a significant degree in lieu of NASA funding or direction. SpaceX, on the other hand, hasn’t missed a beat and looks set to continue Starship development, production, and testing around the clock regardless of NASA’s capacity to help.

In other words, with a little luck, the actual schedule impact of a maximum 100-day work and funding freeze should be a tiny fraction of what it could have been if NASA had selected an HLS provider more interested in profit margins and stock buybacks than creating a sustainable path for humanity’s expansion beyond Earth.

Advertisement
Related Topics:

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

News

Tesla Robotaxi gets a small but significant change

In the world of Tesla, where billion-dollar battery breakthroughs and autonomy milestones dominate headlines, a quiet design update can still pack a punch.

Published

19 hours ago

on

March 28, 2026

By

Credit: David Moss | X

In the world of Tesla, where billion-dollar battery breakthroughs and autonomy milestones dominate headlines, a quiet design update can still pack a punch.

Last week in downtown Austin, sharp-eyed observers spotted a subtle but telling evolution on the Cybercab: a new “ROBOTAXI” logo graphic now graces the vehicle’s doors at Tesla’s Autonomy Popup.

What looks at first glance like a minor stylistic choice is, in fact, a deliberate rebranding move that hints at how the company envisions its robotaxi fleet fitting into everyday life.

The updated lettering is bold, graffiti-inspired, and unapologetically street-smart. Rendered in black with dripping white accents and a glowing yellow outline, the font evokes urban energy and playful irreverence.

Gone is the sleek, minimalist typography that defined earlier Cybercab prototypes. In its place is something more human, almost rebellious.

The new logo pops against the Cybercab’s smooth, metallic body, turning the autonomous pod into a rolling piece of public art rather than just another futuristic taxi.

Designers know that fonts are silent brand ambassadors. They shape perception before a single ride is taken. Tesla’s classic sans-serif aesthetic screams precision engineering and Silicon Valley cool.

The new Robotaxi script leans into accessibility and fun, suggesting the vehicle is approachable, not intimidating. For a product meant to ferry strangers through city streets 24/7, that matters. It signals that the robotaxi isn’t reserved for tech elites; it’s for everyone.

Tesla Cybercab spotted next to Model Y shows size comparison

The timing is no accident. With regulatory approvals for unsupervised autonomy advancing and Tesla preparing to scale Cybercab production, the company is shifting from prototype showcase to fleet deployment.

A fresh logo helps differentiate the vehicles visually in dense urban environments—crucial for rider recognition and brand recall. It also aligns with Elon Musk’s long-standing ethos: make the future feel exciting, not sterile.

Small changes like this often foreshadow a larger strategy. Tesla has always obsessed over details—door handles, screen interfaces, even the curvature of a steering wheel.

Updating the Robotaxi font reflects the same meticulous care now applied to consumer-facing autonomy. It’s not just paint on metal; it’s a statement that the ride of the future should feel personal, memorable, and undeniably cool.

In an industry racing toward self-driving fleets, Tesla’s willingness to evolve even the smallest visual cues shows confidence. A font won’t launch the robotaxi network, but it might just help millions climb aboard with a smile.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla makes latest announcement on Model S and Model X

The announcement follows Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s statement on the Q4 2025 earnings call in late January. Musk described the decision as an “honorable discharge” for the two vehicles, noting that production would wind down in Q2 2026.

Published

21 hours ago

on

March 28, 2026

By

Credit: Tesla

Tesla has officially begun winding down production of its flagship Model S and Model X in the United States, notifying owners via email that the long-running models will soon reach the end of the line.

The email, sent to U.S. customers on March 27, opens with gratitude. “Model S and Model X marked the beginning of the world’s transition to electric transportation,” it reads. “These vehicles also made it possible for Tesla to develop the technology that would move our world toward autonomy.”

Tesla officially begins sunset of Model S and Model X

It then delivers the news directly: “As we make way for this autonomous future, Model S and Model X production will be ending. If you’d like to bring home a new Model S or Model X, order yours soon from our limited inventory.”

The message closes with a simple thank-you: “Thank you for being part of our journey.”

The announcement follows Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s statement on the Q4 2025 earnings call in late January. Musk described the decision as an “honorable discharge” for the two vehicles, noting that production would wind down in Q2 2026.

The move frees factory floor space at Fremont, California, for next-generation manufacturing, including Optimus humanoid robots and the upcoming Robotaxi platform.

Introduced in 2012 and 2015, respectively, the Model S and Model X were Tesla’s original halo cars. They proved EVs could outperform gasoline luxury vehicles in acceleration, range, and tech features while pioneering over-the-air updates and early autonomy hardware.

Although they never matched the volume of the Model 3 and Model Y, their engineering breakthroughs laid the foundation for the company’s current lineup and full self-driving development.

Early adopters highlighted how the cars convinced them to invest in Tesla stock and the EV movement. Some U.S. owners who had not yet received the note voiced mild frustration, and international customers confirmed the outreach remains U.S.-only for now.

Tesla has not detailed an exact final production date beyond the Q2 2026 target or confirmed immediate replacements. Speculation continues about a possible Cybertruck-derived SUV, but the company’s public focus has shifted squarely to autonomy and robotics.

For buyers still interested in the S or X, the window is closing. Inventory is described as limited, and Tesla’s Korean division has already set a March 31 cutoff for new orders in that market. The email serves as both a farewell and final sales push, an elegant close to a chapter that helped define modern electric driving.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Tesla drives drunk owner while he naps, Police still arrest him on DUI

A Vacaville man let his Tesla drive while he napped, but police had other ideas.

Published

1 day ago

on

March 27, 2026

By

Tesla drives drunk owner, Police arrest on DUI [Credit: Vacaville Police via Facebook]

A Northern California man found a creative solution to drunk driving this week by letting his Tesla drive him around while he took a booze snooze. Police in Vacaville arrested a man on a DUI charge after he was found, what appears to be, completely passed out behind the wheel of a Tesla Model Y, which was safely self-navigating the owner through busy streets. The man’s passenger seat told the rest of the story, with a four-pack of Sutter Home wine bottles and a box of Round Table pizza clearly visible.

According to the Vacaville Police Department, as posted through their Facebook page, a concerned community member spotted the very relaxed driver, stayed on the line with dispatch, and guided officers to the intersection of Elmira Road and Shasta Drive where they stopped the vehicle. Alcohol and marijuana were confirmed. No medical emergency, and what appears to be just an extremely committed drunken nap.

The Vacaville Police noted that California permits drivers to use assistive driving features like Tesla’s FSD, but the law still requires them to be “conscious, alert, and not under the influence while operating them.” The post drew some humorous reactions in the comments section, with one commenter piping in, “That time when his vehicle had more situational awareness than he did.” Another commenter chimed in, “Sutter all the way home….”

Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.2.1 texting and driving: we tested it

The incident lands in an interesting moment for Tesla. Elon Musk caused his own stir in December 2025 when he responded to a user question about whether FSD v14.2.1 allowed texting behind the wheel with a simple “Depending on context of surrounding traffic, yes.” He had earlier told investors that drivers turning off autopilot to check texts while steering with their knees was “significantly less safe” than simply letting FSD run, which he called “kind of the killer app.” Neither statement included anything about Sutter Home wine being part of the equation.

Continue Reading