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.
News
Tesla CEO Elon Musk outlines expectations for Cybercab production
“…initial production is always very slow and follows an S-curve. The speed of production ramp is inversely proportionate to how many new parts and steps there are. For Cybercab and Optimus, almost everything is new, so the early production rate will be agonizingly slow, but eventually end up being insanely fast.”
Tesla CEO Elon Musk outlined expectations for Cybercab production as the vehicle is officially set to start rolling off manufacturing lines at the company’s Giga Texas factory in less than 100 days.
Cybercab is specifically designed and catered to Tesla’s self-driving platform and Robotaxi ride-hailing service. The company has been pushing hard to meet its self-set expectations for rolling out an effective self-driving suite, and with the Cybercab coming in under 100 days, it now needs to push for Unsupervised Self-Driving in the same time frame.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk confirms Robotaxi is set to go unsupervised
This is especially pertinent because the Cybercab is expected to be built without a steering wheel or pedals, and although some executives have said they would build the car with those things if it were necessary.
However, Musk has maintained that the Cybercab will not have either of those things: it will have two seats and a screen, and that’s it.
With production scheduled for less than 100 days, Musk broke down what people should expect from the initial manufacturing phases, being cautiously optimistic about what the early stages will likely entail:
“…initial production is always very slow and follows an S-curve. The speed of production ramp is inversely proportionate to how many new parts and steps there are. For Cybercab and Optimus, almost everything is new, so the early production rate will be agonizingly slow, but eventually end up being insanely fast.”
Musk knows better than most about the challenges of ramping up production of vehicles. With the Model 3, Musk routinely refers to it as “production hell.” The Cybertruck, because of its polarizing design and stainless steel exterior, also presented challenges to Tesla.
With the important caveat that initial production is always very slow and follows an S-curve.
The speed of the production ramp is inversely proportionate to how many new parts and steps there are.
For Cybercab and Optimus, almost everything is new, so the early production…
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 20, 2026
The Cybercab definitely presents an easier production process for Tesla, and the company plans to build millions of units per year.
Musk said back in October 2024:
“We’re aiming for at least 2 million units a year of Cybercab. That will be in more than one factory, but I think it’s at least 2 million units a year, maybe 4 million ultimately.”
When April comes, we will find out exactly how things will move forward with Cybercab production.
News
Tesla reveals awesome Model 3 and Model Y incentive, but it’s ending soon
Tesla has revealed an awesome Model 3 and Model Y incentive to help consumers make the jump to one of its affordable mass-market vehicles, but it’s ending soon.
Tesla is offering one free upgrade on eligible inventory of the Model 3 and Model Y until February 2.
This would help buyers receive the most expensive paid option on the vehicle at no additional cost, meaning white interior or a more premium paint option will be free of charge if you take delivery on or before February 2.
Tesla states on its website for the offer:
“Only for limited inventory while supplies last. Price displayed on inventory listings already deducts the cost of the free option.”
Tesla says its one free upgrade offer on eligible U.S. inventory for the Model 3 and Model Y ends February 2.
With this incentive, buyers receive the most expensive paid option on the vehicle at no additional cost (up to $2k in savings). pic.twitter.com/IhoiURrsDI
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) January 21, 2026
This latest incentive is just another advantage Tesla has by selling its vehicles directly and not using some sort of dealership model that relies on approvals from higher-ups. It is important to note that these programs are offered to help stimulate demand and push vehicles into customers’ hands.
It is not the only incentive Tesla is currently offering, either. In fact, there is a much larger incentive program that Tesla is working on, and it has to do with Full Self-Driving transfers, which could result in even more sales for the company through Q1.
Tesla is ending its FSD Transfer program on March 31, as it plans to transition to a Subscription-only basis with the self-driving suite for anyone who has not already purchased it outright.
This could help drive some on-the-fence buyers to new vehicles, but it remains to be seen. Given the timing of the program’s demise, it appears Tesla is hoping to use it to add additional sales and bolster a strong Q1 2026.
Interior and exterior paint colors can add up to $2,000 if you choose the most premium Ultra Red body color, or an additional $1,000 for the Black and White interior option. The discount, while small, could help get someone their preferred design configuration, instead of settling for something that is not quite what they want.
News
Tesla Full Self-Driving gets outrageous insurance offer with insanely cheap rates
Tesla Full Self-Driving is getting an outrageous insurance offer with insanely cheap rates that will slash the cost of coverage by 50 percent.
Lemonade, a digital insurance company, has launched its first-of-a-kind product known as Lemonade Autonomous Car Insurance, and it is starting with an exclusive offer to FSD. The new offer will cut rates for FSD-engaged driving by “approximately 50 percent,” highlighting the data that shows a significantly safer driving environment when the suite is activated and engaged.
The company also said it plans to introduce even cheaper rates as Tesla continues to release more advanced FSD versions through software updates. Tesla has been releasing new FSD versions every few weeks, highlighting vast improvements for those who have the latest AI4 chip.
The announcement comes just a few months afterLemonade Co-Founder and President Shai Wininger said that he wanted to insure FSD vehicles for “almost free.” He said that Tesla’s API complemented Lemonade’s AI-based platform because it provides “richer and more accurate driving behavior data than traditional UBI devices.”
Tesla Full Self-Driving gets an offer to be insured for ‘almost free’
In mid-December, Lemonade then offered Tesla owners in California, Oregon, and Arizona the opportunity to connect their vehicles directly to the company’s app, which would provide a direct connection and would require a separate telematics device, which is required with other insurance providers who offer rates based on driving behaviors.
This latest development between Lemonade and Tesla is something that Wininger believes will be different because of the advanced nature of FSD:
“Traditional insurers treat a Tesla like any other car, and AI like any other driver. But a car that sees 360 degrees, never gets drowsy, and reacts in milliseconds can’t be compared to a human.”
He went on to say that the existing pay-per-mile product has given the company something that no traditional insurer has been able to offer. This comes through Lemonade’s “unique tech stack designed to collect massive amounts of real driving data for precise, dynamic pricing.”
The reputation FSD has gathered over the past few years is really impressive. Wininger backed this with some more compliments:
“Teslas driven with FSD are involved in far fewer accidents. By connecting to the Tesla onboard computer, our models are able to ingest incredibly nuanced sensor data that lets us price our insurance with higher precision than ever before.”
The product will begin its official rollout in Arizona on January 26. Oregon will get it a month later.