News
SpaceX vs. Blue Origin: The bickering titans of new space
In the past three years, SpaceX has made incredible progress in their program of reusability. In the practice’s first year, the young space company led by serial tech entrepreneur Elon Musk has performed three successful commercial reuses of Falcon 9 boosters in approximately eight months, and has at least two more reused flights scheduled before 2017 is out. Blue Origin, headed and funded by Jeff Bezos of Amazon fame, is perhaps most famous for its supreme confidence, best illustrated by Bezos offhandedly welcoming SpaceX “to the club” after the company first recovered the booster stage of its Falcon 9 rocket in 2015.
Blue Origin began in the early 2000s as a pet project of Bezos, a long-time fan of spaceflight and proponent of developing economies in space. After more than a decade of persistent development and increasingly complex testbeds, Blue Origin began a multi-year program of test flights with its small New Shepard launch vehicle. Designed to eventually launch tourists to the veritable edge of Earth’s atmosphere in a capsule atop it, New Shepard began its test flights in 2015 and after one partial failure, has completed five successful flights in a row. The space tourism company has subtly and not-so-subtly belittled SpaceX’s accomplishments over the last several years, and has engendered a fair bit of hostility towards it as a result.
Admittedly, CEO Elon Musk nurtured high expectations for the consequences of reuse, and has frequently discussed SpaceX’s ambition to reduce the cost of access to orbit by a factor of 10 to 100. However, after several reuses, it is clear that costs have decreased no more than 10-20%. What gives?
Well, Musk’s many comments on magnitudes of cost reduction were clearly premised upon rapid and complete reuse of both stages of Falcon 9, best evidenced by a concept video the company released in 2011.
The reality was considerably harder and Musk clearly underestimated the difficulty of second stage reuse, something he himself has admitted. COO Gwynne Shotwell was interviewed earlier this summer and discussed SpaceX’s updated approach to complete reusability, and acknowledged that second stage reuse was no longer a real priority, although the company will likely attempt second stage recovery as a validation of future technologies. Instead of pursuing the development of a completely reusable Falcon 9, SpaceX is instead pushing ahead with the development of a much larger rocket, BFR. BFR being designed to enable the sustainable colonization of space by realizing Musk’s original ambition of magnitudes-cheaper orbital launch capabilities.
Competition on the horizon?
Meanwhile, SpaceX’s only near-term competitor interested in serious reuse has made gradual progress over the last several years, accelerating its pace of development more recently. Blue Origin’s second New Shepard vehicle, designed to serve the suborbital space tourism industry, conducted an impressive five successful launches and landings over the course of 2016 before being summarily retired. NS2’s antecedent suffered a failure while attempting its first landing and was destroyed in 2015, but Blue learned quickly from the issues of Shepard 1 and has already shipped New Shepard 3 to its suborbital launch facilities near Van Horn, Texas. While NS3 is aiming for an inaugural flight later this year, NS4 is under construction in Kent, Washington and could support Blue’s first crewed suborbital launches in 2018.
More significant waves were made with an announcement in 2016 that Blue was pursuing development of a partially reusable orbital-class launch vehicle, the massive New Glenn. On paper, New Glenn is quite a bit larger than even SpaceX’s Falcon 9, and appears to likely be more capable than the company’s “world’s most powerful rocket” while completely recovering its boost stage. In a completed, manufactured, and demonstrably reliable form, New Glenn would be an extraordinarily impressive and capable launch vehicle that could undoubtedly catapult Blue Origin into position of true competition with SpaceX’s reusability efforts.
- The New Shepard booster. (Blue Origin)
- Blue Origin’s New Shepard capsule could carry passengers as high as 100km in 2018. (Blue Origin)
- A render of Blue Origin’s larger New Glenn vehicle. (Blue Origin)
However, while Blue Origin executives brag about “operational reusability” and tastelessly lampoon efforts that “decided to slap some legs on [to] see if [they] could land it”, the unmentioned company implicated in those barbs has begun to routintely and commercially reuse orbital-class boosters five times the size of Blue’s suborbital testbed, New Shepard.
Apples to oranges
The only point at which Blue Origin poses a risk to SpaceX’s business can be found in a comparison of funding sources. SpaceX first successes (and failures) were funded out of Elon Musk’s own pocket, but nearly all of the funding that followed was won through competitive government contracts and rounds of private investment. To put it more simply, SpaceX is a business that must balance costs and returns, while Blue Origin is funded exclusively out of billionaire CEO Jeff Bezos’ pocket.
As a result of being completely privately funded, Bezos’ deep pockets could render Blue more flexible than SpaceX when pricing launches. If Blue chooses to aggressively price New Glenn by accounting for booster reusability, it could pose a threat to SpaceX’s own business strategy. If SpaceX is unable to recoup its investment in reusability before New Glenn is regularly conducting multiple commercial missions per year, likely no earlier than 2021 or 2022, SpaceX’s Falcon 9 pricing could be rendered distinctly noncompetitive.
However, this concern seems almost entirely misplaced. SpaceX has half a decade of experience mass-producing orbital-class (reusable) rockets, (reusable) fairings, and propulsion systems, whereas Blue Origin at best has minimal experience manufacturing a handful of suborbital vehicles over a period of a few years. Blue has a respectable amount of experience with their BE-3 hydrolox propulsion system, and that will likely transfer over to the BE-3U vacuum variant to be used for New Glenn’s third stage. The large methalox rocket engine (BE-4) that will power New Glenn’s first stage also conducted its first-ever hot-fire just weeks ago, a major milestone in propulsion development but also a reminder that BE-4 has an exhaustive regime of engineering verification and flight qualification testing ahead of it.
First hotfire of our BE-4 engine is a success #GradatimFerociter pic.twitter.com/xuotdzfDjF
— Blue Origin (@blueorigin) October 19, 2017
Perhaps more importantly, the company’s relative success with New Shepard’s launch, recovery, and reuse has not and cannot move beyond small suborbital hops, and thus cannot provide the experience at the level of orbital rocketry. New Shepard is admittedly capable of reaching an altitude of 100km, but the suborbital vehicle’s flight regime does not require it to travel beyond Mach 4 (~1300 m/s). The first stage of Falcon 9, however, is approximately four times as tall and three times the mass of New Shepard, and boosters attempting recovery during geostationary missions routinely reach almost twice the velocity of New Shepard, entering the thicker atmosphere at more than 2300 m/s (1500-1800 m/s for LEO missions). Falcon 9’s larger mass and velocity translates into intense reentry heating and aerodynamic forces, best demonstrated by the glowing aluminum grid fins that can often be seen in SpaceX’s live coverage of booster recovery. Blue Origin’s New Glenn concept is extremely impressive on paper, but the company will have to pull off an extraordinary leap of technological maturation to move directly from suborbital single-stage hops to multi-stage orbital rocketry. Blue’s accomplishments with New Shepard are nothing to scoff at, but they are a far cry from routine orbital launch services.
SpaceX’s future fast approaches
Translating back to the new establishment, Falcon 9 will likely remain SpaceX’s workhorse rocket for some five or more years, at least until BFR can prove itself to be a reliable and affordable replacement. This change in focus, combined with the downsides of second stage recovery and reuse on a Falcon 9-sized vehicle, means that SpaceX will ‘only’ end up operationally reusing first stages and fairings from the vehicle. The second stage accounts for approximately 20-30% of Falcon 9’s total cost, suggesting that rapid and complete reuse of the fairing and first stage could more than halve its ~$62 million price. Yet this too ignores another mundane fact of corporate life SpaceX must face. Its executives, Musk included, have lately expressed a desire to at least partially recoup the ~$1 billion that was invested to develop reuse. Assuming a partial 10% reduction in cost to reuse customers and profit margins of 50% with rapid and total reuse of the first stage and fairing, 20 to 30 commercial reuses would recoup most or all of SpaceX’s reusability investment.
Musk recently revealed that SpaceX is aiming to complete 30 launches in 2018, and that figure will likely continue to grow in 2019, assuming no major anomalies occur. Manufacturing will rapidly become the main choke point for increased launch cadence, suggesting that drastically higher cadences will largely depend upon first stage reuse with minimal refurbishment, which just so happens to be the goal of the Falcon 9’s upcoming Block 5 iteration. Even if the modifications only manage a handful of launches without refurbishment, rather than the ten flights being pursued, each additional flight without maintenance will effectively multiply SpaceX’s manufacturing capabilities. More bluntly: ten Falcon 9s capable of five reflights could do the same job of 50 brand new rockets with 1/5th of the manufacturing backend.
- BulgariaSat-1 was successfully launched 48 hours before Iridium-2, and marked the second or three successful, commercial reuses of an orbital rocket. (SpaceX)
- SpaceX’s Hawthorne factory routinely churns out one to two complete Falcon 9s every month. (SpaceX)
- Falcon 9 B1040 returns to LZ-1 after the launch of the USAF’s X-37B spaceplane. (SpaceX)
Assuming that upcoming reuses proceed without significant failures and Falcon 9 Block 5 subsumes all manufacturing sometime in 2018 or 2019, it is entirely possible that SpaceX will undergo an extraordinarily rapid phase change from expendability to reusability. Mirroring 2017, we can imagine that SpaceX’s Hawthorne factory will continue to churn out at least 10 to 20 Block 5 Falcon 9s over the course of 2018. Assuming 5 to 10 maintenance-free reuses and a lifespan of as many as 100 flights with intermittent refurb, a single year of manufacturing could provide SpaceX with enough first stages to launch anywhere from 50 to 2000 missions. The reality will inevitably find itself somewhere between those extremely pessimistic and optimistic bookends, and they of course do not account for fairings, second stages, or expendable flights.
If we assume that the proportional cost of Falcon 9’s many components very roughly approximates the amount of manufacturing backend needed to produce them, downsizing Falcon 9 booster production by a factor of two or more could free a huge fraction of SpaceX’s workforce and floor space to be repurposed for fairing and second stage production, as well as the company’s Mars efforts. Such a phase change would also free up a considerable fraction of the capital SpaceX continually invests in its manufacturing infrastructure and workforce, capital that could then be used to ready SpaceX’s facilities for production and testing of its Mars-focused BFR and BFS.
“Gradatim ferociter”
It cannot be overstated that the speculation in this article is speculation. Nevertheless, it is speculation built on real information provided over the years by SpaceX’s own executives. Rough estimates like this offer a glimpse into a new launch industry paradigm that could be only a year or two away and could allow SpaceX to begin aggressively pursuing its goal of enabling a sustainable human presence on Mars and throughout the Solar System.
Blue Origin’s future endeavors shine on paper and their goal of enabling millions to work and live space are admirable, but the years between the present and a future of routine orbital missions for the company may not be kind. The engineering hurdles that litter the path to orbital rocketry are unforgiving and can only be exacerbated by blind overconfidence, a lesson that is often only learned the hard way. Blue Origin’s proud motto “Gradatim ferociter” roughly translates to “Step by step, ferociously.” One can only hope that some level of humility and sobriety might temper that ferocity before customers entrust New Glenn with their infrastructural foundations and passengers entrust New Shepard with their lives.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk reveals date of Tesla Full Self-Driving’s next massive release
Initially planned for a January or February release, v14.3 aims to add some reasoning and logic to the decisions that Full Self-Driving makes, which could improve a lot of things, including Navigation, which is a major complaint of many owners currently.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk revealed the date of Full Self-Driving’s next massive release: v14.3.
For months, Tesla owners with Hardware 4 have been utilizing Full Self-Driving v14.2 and subsequent releases. Currently, the most up-to-date FSD version is v14.2.2.5, which has definitely brought out mixed reviews. With releases, some things get better, and other things might regress slightly.
For the most part, things are better in terms of overall behavior.
However, many owners have been looking forward to the next release, which is v14.3, about which Musk has said many great things. Back in November, Musk said that v14.3 “is where the last big piece of the puzzle lands.”
He added:
“We’re gonna add a lot of reasoning and RL (reinforcement learning). To get to serious scale, Tesla will probably need to build a giant chip fab. To have a few hundred gigawatts of AI chips per year, I don’t see that capability coming online fast enough, so we will probably have to build a fab.”
Initially planned for a January or February release, v14.3 aims to add some reasoning and logic to the decisions that Full Self-Driving makes, which could improve a lot of things, including Navigation, which is a major complaint of many owners currently.
Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.2 is a considerable improvement from early versions of the suite, but we have written about the somewhat confusing updates that have come with recent versions.
Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.2.2.5 might be the most confusing release ever
They’ve been incredibly difficult to gauge in terms of progress because some things have gotten better, but there seems to be some real regression on a handful of things, especially with confidence and assertiveness.
Musk confirmed today on X that Tesla is already testing v14.3 internally right now. It will hit a wide release “in a few weeks,” so we should probably expect it by late April.
It’s in testing right now. Wide release in a few weeks.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) March 19, 2026
Overall, there are high hopes that v14.3 could be a true game changer for Tesla Full Self-Driving, as many believe it could be the version that Robotaxis in Austin, Texas, some of which are driverless and unsupervised, are running.
It could also include some major additions, including “Banish,” also referred to as “Reverse Summon,” which would go find a parking spot after dropping occupants off at their destination.
What Tesla will roll out, and when exactly it arrives, all remain to be seen, but fans have been ready for a new version as v14.2.2.5 has definitely run its course. We have had a lot of readers tell us their biggest request is to fix Navigation errors, which seem to be one of the most universal complaints among daily FSD users.
Cybertruck
Chattanooga Charge: Tesla and EV fans ready for the Southeast’s wildest Tesla party
From Cybertruck Convoys to Kid-Friendly Fun Zones: The Chattanooga Charge Has Something for Everyone
Hundreds of like-minded Tesla and EV enthusiasts are descending on Chattanooga Charge this weekend for the largest Tesla meet in the Southeast. Taking place on March 20–22, 2026 at the stunning Tennessee Riverpark.
If you were there last year, you’ll know that it’s the ultimate experience to see the wildest Teslas in action, see the best in EV tech, and arguably the most fun – finally put a name to the face and connect with those social media buddies IRL! Oh, and that epic night time Tesla light show is a once-in-a-lifetime experience that will transform the Riverpark into something out of a sci-fi film that’s remarkably unforgettable and must be seen in person.
This year’s event takes everything up a notch, with over 100 Cybertrucks expected to be on display, many sporting jaw-dropping modifications and custom wraps that push the boundaries of what these stainless steel beasts can look like.
Whether you’re a diehard Tesla fan, EV supporter, or just EV-mod-curious, the sheer spectacle is worth the drive.
The Chattanooga Charge doesn’t wait until Saturday morning to get started. The weekend technically kicks off Friday, March 20th, and the venue sets the tone immediately. Come share roadtrip stories over drinks at the W-XYZ Rooftop Bar on the top floor of the Aloft Chattanooga Hamilton Place Hotel, with sunset views over the city.
Come morning, nurse your hangover with a some good coffee, and convoy with hundreds of other Tesla and EV drivers through Chattanooga to the event for some morning meet and greets before the speaker panel starts and the food trucks fire up.
Tesla owner clubs travel from across the country to be here, not just to show off their vehicles,, but to connect, share, and celebrate a shared passion for the future of driving.
Sounds like a plan to me. See you there, guys. Don’t miss it. Get your tickets at ChattanoogaCharge.com and join the charge. 🔋⚡
Chattanooga Charge is a premier Tesla and EV gathering inspired by the X Takeover, known as one of the largest Tesla event gatherings. What began as a bold idea from the team at DIY Wraps/TESBROS, hosted in their hometown of Chattanooga, Tennessee, the event quickly became a movement across social media. The first annual Chattanooga Charge united over 16 Tesla clubs from 16 states, proof that the EV community was hungry for something big in the South. Year after year, the event has grown in scale, ambition, and heart.
News
Tesla Full Self-Driving gets latest bit of scrutiny from NHTSA
The analysis impacts roughly 3.2 million vehicles across the company’s entire lineup, and aims to identify how the suite’s degradation detection systems work and how effective they are when the cars encounter difficult visibility conditions.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has elevated its probe into Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (Supervised) suite to an Engineering Analysis.
The analysis impacts roughly 3.2 million vehicles across the company’s entire lineup, and aims to identify how the suite’s degradation detection systems work and how effective they are when the cars encounter difficult visibility conditions.
The step up into an Engineering Analysis is often required before the NHTSA will tell an automaker to issue a recall. However, this is not a guarantee that a recall will be issued.
🚨 The NHTSA said it was upgrading a probe into Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (Supervised) platform to an “engineering analysis”
It will examine 3.2 million vehicles and aims to determine its effectiveness in evaluating degraded road conditions pic.twitter.com/2dkrv1mR8o
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) March 19, 2026
The NTHSA wants to examine Tesla FSD’s ability to assess road conditions that have reduced visibility, as well as detect degradation to alert the driver with sufficient time to respond.
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) will evaluate the performance of FSD in degraded roadway conditions and the updates or modifications Tesla makes to the degradation detection system, including the timing, purpose, and capabilities of the updates.
Tesla routinely ships software updates to improve the capabilities of the FSD suite, so it will be interesting to see if various versions of FSD are tested. Interestingly, you can find many examples from real-world users of FSD handling snow-covered roads, heavy rain, and single-lane backroads.
However, there are incidents that the NHTSA has used to determine the need for this probe, at least for now. The agency said:
“Available incident data raise concerns that Tesla’s degradation detection system, both as originally deployed and later updated, fails to detect and/or warn the driver appropriately under degraded visibility conditions such as glare and airborne obscurants. In the crashes that ODI has reviewed, the system did not detect common roadway conditions that impaired camera visibility and/or provide alerts when camera performance had deteriorated until immediately before the crash occurred.”
It continues to say in its report that a review of Tesla’s responses revealed additional crashes that occurred in similar environments showed FSD “did not detect a degraded state, and/or it did not present the driver with an alert with adequate time for the driver to react. In each of these crashes, FSD also lost track of or never detected a lead vehicle in its path.”
The next steps of the NHTSA Engineering Analysis require the agency to gather further information on Tesla’s attempts to upgrade the degradation detection system. It will also analyze six recent potentially related incidents.
The investigation is listed as EA26002.





