Connect with us

News

SpaceX’s Starship to return humanity to the Moon in stunning NASA decision

SpaceX - and only SpaceX - has won a competitive NASA contract to land a Starship - and eventually astronauts - on the Moon. (NASA)

Published

5 years ago

on

In one of the biggest NASA contracting surprises in years, the space agency has chosen SpaceX – and only SpaceX – to return humans to the surface of the Moon with its next-generation Starship rocket.

The Washington Post’s Christian Davenport broke the news a few hours before NASA’s scheduled announcement and teleconference, revealing that SpaceX beat out Dynetics and a Blue Origin-led “National Team” for a sole-source contract to build, launch, and land a custom version of Starship on the Moon for $2.89 billion. If that uncrewed testing is successful, SpaceX and Starship will be tasked with landing the first astronauts on the Moon in half a century as early as the in the mid-2020s.

While a Human Landing System (HLS) announcement was fully planned and expected to happen this month, virtually everyone following the process believed that NASA would continue to lean on the rationale behind selecting multiple providers for its Commercial Resupply Services (CRS) and Commercial Crew (CCP) programs. Having multiple distinct providers, spacecraft, and rockets available to accomplish the same tasks fundamentally insulates NASA (and the International Space Station that depends on those programs) from losing the ability to transport crew or cargo in the event that any one provider is delayed or suffers a major failure.

With a goal as complex as landing humans back on the Moon for the first time since the 1970s, redundancy and multiple distinct solutions would obviously be even more desirable. Entirely contrary to expectations, NASA instead announced that it had exclusively contracted with SpaceX alone for next phase of HLS development. Though SpaceX may have been the only competitor already testing something approximating real integrated flight hardware, NASA’s decision to sole-source HLS to Starship represents a significant gamble.

Advertisement

Simultaneously, though, the move is also extraordinarily pragmatic and indicates that one or several major decisionmakers at NASA have taken less positive lessons from its commercial cargo and crew programs to heart. Crucially, over the first several years of the Commercial Crew Program (CCP), Congress systematically underfunded the development of two commercial crew spacecraft – one from Boeing and the other from SpaceX. As a direct result, the launch debuts of both spacecraft were delayed by several years, forcing NASA to to continue relying on Russian Soyuz launches well into the 2020s to get its astronauts to the ISS.

Additionally, SpaceX – an unequivocal underdog and newbie next to Boeing in the mid-2010s – has drastically outperformed its traditional aerospace counterpart, beating Boeing to the punch and launching astronauts first. Boeing’s Starliner is now at least 18 months behind Crew Dragon despite costing almost 60% more.

In its first year on the books, almost mirroring NASA’s Commercial Crew experience, Congress aggressively underfunded the HLS program, allotting $850M – just 25% – of the $3.4B NASA requested. In other words, NASA seems to be proceeding with HLS under the assumption that Congress – as it did with CCP – will continue to chronically underfund the lunar lander program for years to come. If that’s the case, NASA appears to have made an uncharacteristically astute decision to structure HLS not on its preferred budget – but on what the agency believes Congress will pony up.

Put in a slightly different way, NASA is basically telling Congress that its lack of commitment has forced the agency to sole-source its lunar lander contract to SpaceX, putting the impetus on Congress to properly fund the HLS program if it wants redundant providers. All told, while NASA is undoubtedly taking a risk selecting SpaceX and Starship to return both it and humanity to the Moon, the space agency has now made it abundantly clear that it’s fully committed to the program and goal, whether or not Congress is willing to do its job.

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 Model 3 has a tasty Supercharging incentive, but it’s ending soon

Published

58 minutes ago

on

June 5, 2026

By

Credit: Tesla

Tesla is offering a tasty Supercharging incentive on certain Model 3 trims, but the company has officially put a concrete end date on it, so those interested should act fast.

Tesla is offering Free Supercharging for One Year on the Model 3 Premium and Performance trims, the top two offerings of the all-electric sedan. There are three trims of the Model 3 that will have the Free Supercharging offer attached:

  • Premium Rear-Wheel-Drive – $42,490
  • Premium All-Wheel-Drive – $47,490
  • Performance – $54,990

Tesla has now announced that this offer will expire on June 15, giving potential buyers about ten days to take advantage of the incentive.

This could be an additional incentive for car buyers to transition to electric vehicles. Many states are showing gas prices well over $4 per gallon, with the national average currently sitting at $4.22, according to AAA.

Tesla Model 3 wins Edmunds’ Best EV of 2026 award

A free year of Supercharging miles would allow people to charge and travel for free, other than routine maintenance, which is already incredibly cheap compared to a gas car.

At Tesla Superchargers, peak rates, meaning prices between 8 a.m. and 10 p.m., average between $0.45 and $0.60. One year of driving at an average of 12,000 miles would cost between $1,000 and $1,500 at $0.50 per kWh. It’s a pretty good deal.

Supercharging prices have also increased recently:

Tesla has used Free Supercharging to move units in the past, and it’s a great strategy for those who plan to use the car for longer commutes, cross-country drives, or do not have reliable access to home charging.

It should be noted that Tesla recommends that Supercharging be used at a minimum to preserve the life of the battery, as fast-charging is more stressful on the cells.

However, some people might not have an option, so the Free Supercharging incentive could truly be a great reason for many people to charge their cars.

The Supercharging incentive is short-term, and it is pretty rare that Tesla utilizes it, so once this offer is gone, we probably will not see it on the Model 3 for some time.

Continue Reading

News

Ferrari CEO’s self-driving stance echoes Elon Musk’s — sort of

Published

2 hours ago

on

June 5, 2026

By

Credit: Tesla | Ferrari

Ferrari CEO Benedetto Vigna revealed that the Italian automaker’s future will not involve self-driving, a point that echoes that of Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s — sort of.

You might be thinking, “Are you insane? Musk has been so incredibly hellbent on delivering self-driving vehicles to the public, so much so that he has even hinted that Tesla won’t need the ever-popular and widely-requested Model Y L in the U.S.”

However, when it comes to electric supercars with high-performance specs and lofty price tags, Vigna’s stance is exactly what Musk wants for Tesla’s own hypercar project, the Tesla Roadster.

In a new interview with Australian media outlet Drive, Vigna made it clear that Ferrari’s ambitions for the future do not involve autonomy, simply because the company’s cars are not designed for anything but manual, spirited driving.

He said:

“We will not make fully autonomous cars — loud and clear. We want the people to have fun, not the [computer] chips. We want to have a steering wheel and a man or a woman behind the steering wheel. Otherwise, why do you buy a Ferrari?”

This seems to be a reasonable assertion. Ferraris are not made for daily commutes, cross-country road trips, or bumper-to-bumper traffic. They’re made for fast, spirited driving, and many of their buyers will only put a few thousand miles on them throughout their lifetime. True, exciting, fun driving is meant to be done manually.

That is not to say Full Self-Driving or other semi-autonomous suites are not “fun,” but they are meant to take the stress out of driving. They are made for the daily commutes, the rush hour traffic, and the parking lots and garages. It’s made to take the stress out of driving.

Tesla Full Self-Driving attempts 150-mile stress test: the good and the bad

Musk had stated in an interview in early 2026 that the Roadster would also be geared toward fun, manually-controlled driving. On the Moonshots podcast with Peter Diamandis, Musk said about the Roadster:

“This is not a…safety is not the main goal. If you buy a Ferrari, safety is not the number one goal. I say, if safety is your number one goal, do not buy the Roadster…We’ll aspire not to kill anyone in this car. It’ll be the best of the last of the human-driven cars. The best of the last.”

There are cars out there that simply are meant to be driven by humans, and Ferraris and Roadsters are a few of them. Ferrari has no true advantage in developing self-driving; their cars sell at low volumes with high price tags, and their performance specs and engineering are all geared toward spirited driving.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla upgrades Model Y’s affordable trims with new interior features

Published

4 hours ago

on

June 5, 2026

By

Credit: Tesla

Tesla has upgraded the Model Y’s two most affordable trims, the Rear-Wheel-Drive and All-Wheel-Drive, with two new interior features that bring them level with their “Premium” siblings.

The Rear-Wheel-Drive (RWD) and All-Wheel-Drive (AWD) trims, formerly known as the “Standard” offerings of Tesla’s most popular vehicle, are now fitted with the all-black headliner and a higher-quality 16-inch center screen, two features that were added to the Premium trims earlier this year.

The RWD and AWD trims of the Model Y now have a more premium interior feel with these upgrades, and it also appears to be a move by Tesla to streamline manufacturing by eliminating variance across configuration levels.

It makes production less complicated when the interior colors are all identical. Additionally, all Model Y builds now have the larger and higher-resolution screen than previous model years.

Priced at $39,990 and $41,990, respectively, the Model Y RWD and AWD are quite different from the Premium trims. Tesla aimed to make an affordable version of what has been the best-selling car in the world on several occasions, enabling more accessibility.

The differences from an interior standpoint are noticeable, as there is significantly less storage, a lack of A/C seats, and no glass roof. However, the car is still a great option and features a good powertrain, strong range ratings of 321 miles for the RWD and 294 miles for the AWD, and a great ride quality.

Tesla Model Y Standard Full Review: Is it worth the lower price?

Other shortcomings are the lack of acoustic-lined windows, which are featured in the Premium trims to help with excess cabin noise. In our testing of the Model Y Standard back in late 2025, this was perhaps the most noticeable difference between it and the Premium trim. The stereo was also a huge difference:

The RWD and AWD trims of the Model Y are still a great vehicle at an affordable price, and you can experience them for yourself at your local Tesla showroom. Test drives are always available, and it’s a great way to experience an EV for yourself, especially if you have no knowledge about them.

Continue Reading