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

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.

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.

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement

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.

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 launches in India with Model Y, showing pricing will be biggest challenge

Tesla finally got its Model Y launched in India, but it will surely come at a price for consumers.

Published

on

Credit: Narendra Modi | X

Tesla has officially launched in India following years of delays, as it brought its Model Y to the market for the first time on Tuesday.

However, the launch showed that pricing is going to be its biggest challenge. The all-electric Model Y is priced significantly higher than in other major markets in which Tesla operates.

On Tuesday, Tesla’s Model Y went up for sale for 59,89,000 rupees for the Rear-Wheel Drive configuration, while the Long Range Rear-Wheel Drive was priced at 67,89,000.

This equates to $69,686 for the RWD and $78,994 for the Long Range RWD, a substantial markup compared to what these cars sell for in the United States.

Deliveries are currently scheduled for the third quarter, and it will be interesting to see how many units they can sell in the market at this price point.

The price includes tariffs and additional fees that are applied by the Indian government, which has aimed to work with foreign automakers to come to terms on lower duties that increase vehicle cost.

Tesla Model Y seen testing under wraps in India ahead of launch

There is a chance that these duties will be removed, which would create a more stable and affordable pricing model for Tesla in the future. President Trump and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi continue to iron out those details.

Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis said to reporters outside the company’s new outlet in the region (via Reuters):

“In the future, we wish to see R&D and manufacturing done in India, and I am sure at an appropriate stage, Tesla will think about it.”

It appears to be eerily similar to the same “game of chicken” Tesla played with Indian government officials for the past few years. Tesla has always wanted to enter India, but was unable to do so due to these import duties.

India wanted Tesla to commit to building a Gigafactory in the country, but Tesla wanted to test demand first.

It seems this could be that demand test, and the duties are going to have a significant impact on what demand will actually be.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Tesla ups Robotaxi fare price to another comical figure with service area expansion

Tesla upped its fare price for a Robotaxi ride from $4.20 to, you guessed it, $6.90.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla has upped its fare price for the Robotaxi platform in Austin for the first time since its launch on June 22. The increase came on the same day that Tesla expanded its Service Area for the Robotaxi ride-hailing service, offering rides to a broader portion of the city.

The price is up from $4.20, a figure that many Tesla fans will find amusing, considering CEO Elon Musk has used that number, as well as ’69,’ as a light-hearted attempt at comedy over the past several years.

Musk confirmed yesterday that Tesla would up the price per ride from that $4.20 point to $6.90. Are we really surprised that is what the company decided on, as the expansion of the Service Area also took effect on Monday?

The Service Area expansion was also somewhat of a joke too, especially considering the shape of the new region where the driverless service can travel.

I wrote yesterday about how it might be funny, but in reality, it is more of a message to competitors that Tesla can expand in Austin wherever it wants at any time.

Tesla’s Robotaxi expansion wasn’t a joke, it was a warning to competitors

It was only a matter of time before the Robotaxi platform would subject riders to a higher, flat fee for a ride. This is primarily due to two reasons: the size of the access program is increasing, and, more importantly, the service area is expanding in size.

Tesla has already surpassed Waymo in Austin in terms of its service area, which is roughly five square miles larger. Waymo launched driverless rides to the public back in March, while Tesla’s just became available to a small group in June. Tesla has already expanded it, allowing new members to hail a ride from a driverless Model Y nearly every day.

The Robotaxi app is also becoming more robust as Tesla is adding new features with updates. It has already been updated on two occasions, with the most recent improvements being rolled out yesterday.

Tesla updates Robotaxi app with several big changes, including wider service area

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Model Y and Model 3 dominate U.S. EV sales despite headwinds

Tesla’s two mainstream vehicles accounted for more than 40% of all EVs sold in the United States in Q2 2025.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla Asia/X

Tesla’s Model Y and Model 3 remained the top-selling electric vehicles in the U.S. during Q2 2025, even as the broader EV market dipped 6.3% year-over-year. 

The Model Y logged 86,120 units sold, followed by the Model 3 at 48,803. This means that Tesla’s two mainstream vehicles accounted for 43% of all EVs sold in the United States during the second quarter, as per data from Cox Automotive.

Tesla leads amid tax credit uncertainty and a tough first half

Tesla’s performance in Q2 is notable given a series of hurdles earlier in the year. The company temporarily paused Model Y deliveries in Q1 as it transitioned to the production of the new Model Y, and its retail presence was hit by protests and vandalism tied to political backlash against CEO Elon Musk. The fallout carried into Q2, yet Tesla’s two mass-market vehicles still outsold the next eight EVs combined. 

Q2 marked just the third-ever YoY decline in quarterly EV sales, totaling 310,839 units. Electric vehicle sales, however, were still up 4.9% from Q1 and reached a record 607,089 units in the first half of 2025. Analysts also expect a surge in Q3 as buyers rush to qualify for federal EV tax credits before they expire on October 1, Cox Automotive noted in a post.

Legacy rivals gain ground, but Tesla holds its commanding lead

General Motors more than doubled its EV volume in the first half of 2025, selling over 78,000 units and boosting its EV market share to 12.9%. Chevrolet became the second-best-selling EV brand, pushing GM past Ford and Hyundai. Tesla, however, still retained a commanding 44.7% electric vehicle market share despite a 12% drop in in Q2 revenue, following a decline of almost 9% in Q1.

Advertisement

Incentives reached record highs in Q2, averaging 14.8% of transaction prices, roughly $8,500 per vehicle. As government support winds down, the used EV market is also gaining momentum, with over 100,000 used EVs sold in Q2.

Q2 2025 Kelley Blue Book EV Sales Report by Simon Alvarez on Scribd

Continue Reading

Trending