News
SpaceX’s upgraded Starship set for test flight despite sore NASA contract losers
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.
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.
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.
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.
Tesla has taken another concrete step toward owning its battery supply chain, and it’s doing so with what is perhaps the most important vehicle in its short-but-storied history.
On September 23, Tesla announced that it has officially built the first Cybercab with cathode material produced in-house at the company’s first cathode plant in the U.S., and the first in the U.S. overall.
First Cybercab made using our in-house cathode material – from the first cathode plant in the Americas pic.twitter.com/X95aVXsT9H
— Robotaxi (@robotaxi) September 23, 2026
Active cathode material is the most expensive piece of a lithium-ion battery cell, and it often accounts for more than a third of cell cost. For years, the industry sourced a majority of it from Asia, but Tesla’s decision to make it in the United States bodes well for the Cybercab project. This is the latest chapter in Tesla’s vertical integration strategy, which began in public at Battery Day in 2020.
At the Battery Day Event, Elon Musk said the company would build a North American cathode plant and overhaul the process to cut costs and waste, while also making some of the most powerful and long-lasting cells in the industry.
The Austin facility took years to appear. Tesla filed permits for “Project Cathode” in 2022 on land near Giga Texas. By mid-2022, the building frame was up and Tesla later invested hundreds of millions of dollars as part of a larger expansion of the Giga Texas plant. The company stated it was operating the first large-scale cathode production facility in North America to supplement 4680 cell production.
One month later, that material reached a finished Cybercab.
Made with nickel cathode manufactured locally at Gigafactory Texas! https://t.co/DqMm5fZV3n
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 24, 2026
The timing of this breakthrough is monumental for the Cybercab program. As Tesla officially launched the first Cybercab rides to the public earlier this month, production of the ride-hailing-geared vehicle is moving forward on the planned S-curve that CEO Elon Musk told everyone to expect.
Nevertheless, packs of Cybercab units have been spotted throughout the United States, in an effort to potentially activate the fleet as soon as the company gains regulatory approval in various geographic areas.
On top of that, Tesla owning the cathode step and pairing it with its own in-house lithium from the Gulf Coast refinery shortens the supply chain that once stretched thousands of miles and subjects every pack to fewer external price shocks and geopolitical risks.
Tesla is not yet independent of all of its foreign suppliers, as some precursor metals come from mines and chemical plants. But the first in-house cathode Cybercab shows the company is closing the most expensive and most concentrated gap in its battery production efforts. For a vehicle like Cybercab to operate at a high utilization within the Robotaxi network, that control over cost is so crucial.
It is arguably as important as the software that drives it.
Tesla is set to inaugurate its dedicated Semi factory in Sparks, Nevada, this evening, but drone footage has already started to show who is expected on the handover stage.
Zanegler, a drone operator who regularly documents Tesla Semi operations in Nevada, filmed a row of new-generation Semi units parked outside of the plant with customer branding applied. The liveries visible in the video include companies like PepsiCo, U.S. Foods, Einride, DHL, WattEV, and others that have committed to utilizing Tesla’s Class 8 electric truck in their fleets.
Tesla Semi Pre-Reveal Revealed!
Excited to share this segment of the drone flight one day prior to the Tesla Semi Reveal event.
They have added branding to several Tesla new generation semis.
Including:
Pepsico
US Foods
Einride
LTS
Nevoya
OK Produce
ABF Freight
DHL
WattEV… pic.twitter.com/KoFOg2FouR— Zanegler (@HinrichsZane) September 24, 2026
Several of those company names already sit within Tesla’s public ordering book, including PepsiCo, which has been the program’s primary anchor customer since the first Semi deliveries in December 2022. PepsiCo now runs dozens of Tesla Semi units in daily service, with drivers completing regional routes.
Einride placed a 500-unit order in August, which was, at the time, the largest single Semi commitment. First deployments of their Semi units are planned for this month and will eventually span across California, Texas, New Jersey, Illinois, and Georgia. Meanwhile, IMC Logistics announced a 50-truck California order this week.
Tesla Semi lands the biggest electric truck deal in U.S. history
Other names, like LTS, OK Produce, and HMD, have not been widely confirmed as firm buyers, but their presence on the lot is perhaps the clearest signal that Tesla intends to expand on that list this evening at the event.
Tesla first unveiled the Semi back in 2017 with a 2019 production target.
Limited pilot builds reached PepsiCo in late 2022, and high-volume production began at the new 1.7-million-square-foot plant that sits logically positioned next to Tesla’s Gigafactory Nevada. Tesla Semi program director Dan Priestley has said that Tesla expects to build “many thousands” of Semi units this year, but as with every Tesla release, there have been set expectations of an S-curve ramp.
Outside estimates still put 2026 deliveries in the 5,000-to-15,000 range, but it will ultimately depend on Tesla’s readiness to put those units out, as well as how smoothly production is moving internally.
Tesla’s Semi Rollout event is set to start tonight at the Sparks factory, and it will be livestreamed on X starting at 6 p.m. PDT / 9 p.m. ET.
The Tesla App is now giving owners a better indication of what to expect when visiting a Supercharger site, as it is now sharing Site Maps in the app itself, making the feature no longer exclusively available in the car.
Tesla owners can now preview a Supercharger’s layout and live stall status from their phone thanks to the App’s new software version, v4.61.0. Zooming into a supported Supercharger on the charging map now switches the familiar street view into a site-specific map that shows stall positions, occupied bays, out-of-service posts, and a live count of open Superchargers.
It will even show you which specific Tesla model is charging at each occupied stall.
You can now see Live Site Maps in the latest Tesla app (4.61.0.) pic.twitter.com/JIL8QzR8hu
— Zack (@BLKMDL3) September 18, 2026
This is the same view drivers first saw inside the car with the 2025 Holiday Update, which started as a pilot for Tesla in California and Texas. Those early maps showed layout, nearby amenities, and the status of each operational stall. The feature has spread to most Superchargers in the U.S., but now Tesla wants the feature available through the Smartphone App, which is now rolling out to owners.
The in-vehicle screen maps remain a richer 3D canvas and originally required AMD Ryzen infotainment hardware, which left many Intel-based Model 3 and Model Y owners without the view. The app version removes that hardware barrier, so any owner can now get a preview of their upcoming Supercharger stop on their phone.
Anyone with the updated version of the app can open a Site Map on their phone. The feature has provided some additional peace of mind to anxious travelers and those who might be looking for a place that is less congested for faster charging speeds. It is a meaningful addition to many owners, especially for trips to unfamiliar locations.
You can now pick a Supercharger location that might be more aligned with what you are looking for or need: you can pick a site based on what stalls are open, where ADA stalls sit, how you will pull in, and more, instead of circling a crowded lot after arriving. Owners of older cars now have access to the feature without having to purchase a new vehicle altogether.
Site Mpas will not reserve a stall, nor will it change how Fast Charging works. Tesla does something simpler and more useful by giving owners a dedicated preview of the Supercharger they’re about to charge, turning an unknown parking lot into a place that may seem more familiar thanks to the preview.
Interested in ordering a Tesla? Use my referral code for three free months of Full Self-Driving (Supervised) here.
Tesla Cybercab gets initial tie-in to localized, in-house cathode plant
Tesla leaks Semi customers ahead of handover event
