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.
News
Tesla ‘Mad Max’ gets its first bit of regulatory attention
Tesla “Mad Max” mode has gotten its first bit of regulatory attention, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has asked for additional information on the Speed Profile.
A few weeks ago, Tesla officially launched a new Speed Profile for Full Self-Driving (Supervised) known as “Mad Max,” which overtook the “Hurry” mode for the fastest setting FSD offers.
Tesla launches ‘Mad Max’ Full Self-Driving Speed Profile, its fastest yet
It launched with Full Self-Driving v14.1.2, and it was no secret that the company was looking for a new mode that would cater to more aggressive driving styles.
The release notes showed the description of the Speed Profile as:
“Introduced new speed profile MAD MAX, which comes with higher speeds and more frequent lane changes than Hurry.”
It certainly lived up to its description. In our testing, it was aggressive, fast, and drove similarly to some of the more challenging traffic patterns I’ve come across.
In normal highway driving, it was one of the quicker cars on the road, while other applications saw it be a suitable version for navigating things like rush-hour traffic.
Here’s what my experience with it was:
🚨 Tesla “Mad Max” testing on FSD v14.1.2
It drives like a human being! Consistent lane changes, keeps up with quicker traffic, very refined
Well done Tesla Team pic.twitter.com/wzTucDhczA
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 19, 2025
While Tesla owners have certainly enjoyed the feature and the behaviors of Mad Max, the NHTSA said it is in contact with Tesla about it, looking to gather additional information. Additionally, it said:
“The human behind the wheel is fully responsible for driving the vehicle and complying with all traffic safety laws.”
The important thing to note with Mad Max mode, along with the other Speed Profiles, is that the driver can choose whichever one they’d like, and they all cater to different driving styles.
While Mad Max is more aggressive, modes like “Sloth” and “Standard” are significantly more conservative and can be more suitable for those who are not comfortable with the faster, more spirited versions.
News
Tesla shares AI5 chip’s ambitious production roadmap details
Tesla CEO Elon Musk has revealed new details about the company’s next-generation AI5 chip, describing it as “an amazing design.”
Tesla CEO Elon Musk has revealed new details about the company’s next-generation AI5 chip, describing it as “an amazing design” that could outperform its predecessor by a notable margin. Speaking during Tesla’s Q3 2025 earnings call, Musk outlined how the chip will be manufactured in partnership with both Samsung and TSMC, with production based entirely in the United States.
What makes AI5 special
According to Musk, the AI5 represents a complete evolution of Tesla’s in-house AI hardware, building on lessons learned from the AI4 system currently used in its vehicles and data centers. “By some metrics, the AI5 chip will be 40x better than the AI4 chip, not 40%, 40x,” Musk said during the Q3 2025 earnings call. He credited Tesla’s unique vertical integration for the breakthrough, noting that the company designs both the software and hardware stack for its self-driving systems.
To streamline the new chip, Tesla eliminated several traditional components, including the legacy GPU and image signal processor, since the AI5 architecture already incorporates those capabilities. Musk explained that these deletions allow the chip to fit within a half-reticle design, improving efficiency and power management.
“This is a beautiful chip,” Musk said. “I’ve poured so much life energy into this chip personally, and I’m confident this is going to be a winner.”
Tesla’s dual manufacturing strategy for AI5
Musk confirmed that both Samsung’s Texas facility and TSMC’s Arizona plant will fabricate AI5 chips, with each partner contributing to early production. “It makes sense to have both Samsung and TSMC focus on AI5,” the CEO said, adding that while Samsung has slightly more advanced equipment, both fabs will support Tesla’s U.S.-based production goals.
Tesla’s explicit objective, according to Musk, is to create an oversupply of AI5 chips. The surplus units could be used in Tesla’s vehicles, humanoid robots, or data centers, which already use a mix of AI4 and NVIDIA hardware for training. “We’re not about to replace NVIDIA,” Musk clarified. “But if we have too many AI5 chips, we can always put them in the data center.”
Musk emphasized that Tesla’s focus on designing for a single customer gives it a massive advantage in simplicity and optimization. “NVIDIA… (has to) satisfy a large range of requirements from many customers. Tesla only has to satisfy one customer, Tesla,” he said. This, Musk stressed, allows Tesla to delete unnecessary complexity and deliver what could be the best performance per watt and per dollar in the industry once AI5 production scales.
Energy
Tesla VP hints at Solar Roof comeback with Giga New York push
The comments hint at possible renewed life for the Solar Roof program, which has seen years of slow growth since its 2016 unveiling.
Tesla’s long-awaited and way underrated Solar Roof may finally be getting its moment. During the company’s Q3 2025 earnings call, Vice President of Energy Engineering Michael Snyder revealed that production of a new residential solar panel has started at Tesla’s Buffalo, New York facility, with shipments to customers beginning in the first quarter of 2026.
The comments hint at possible renewed life for the Solar Roof program, which has seen years of slow growth since its 2016 unveiling.
Tesla Energy’s strong demand
Responding to an investor question about Tesla’s energy backlog, Snyder said demand for Megapack and Powerwall continues to be “really strong” into next year. He also noted positive customer feedback for the company’s new Megablock product, which is expected to start shipping from Houston in 2026.
“We’re seeing remarkable growth in the demand for AI and data center applications as hyperscalers and utilities have seen the versatility of the Megapack product. It increases reliability and relieves grid constraints,” he said.
Snyder also highlighted a “surge in residential solar demand in the US,” attributing the spike to recent policy changes that incentivize home installations. Tesla expects this trend to continue into 2026, helped by the rollout of a new solar lease product that makes adoption more affordable for homeowners.
Possible Solar Roof revival?
Perhaps the most intriguing part of Snyder’s remarks, however, was Tesla’s move to begin production of its “residential solar panel” in Buffalo, New York. He described the new panels as having “industry-leading aesthetics” and shape performance, language Tesla has used to market its Solar Roof tiles in the past.
“We also began production of our Tesla residential solar panel in our Buffalo factory, and we will be shipping that to customers starting Q1. The panel has industry-leading aesthetics and shape performance and demonstrates our continued commitment to US manufacturing,” Snyder said during the Q3 2025 earnings call.
Snyder did not explicitly name the product, though his reference to aesthetics has fueled speculation that Tesla may finally be preparing a large-scale and serious rollout of its Solar Roof line.
Originally unveiled in 2016, the Solar Roof was intended to transform rooftops into clean energy generators without compromising on design. However, despite early enthusiasm, production and installation volumes have remained limited for years. In 2023, a report from Wood Mackenzie claimed that there were only 3,000 operational Solar Roof installations across the United States at the time, far below forecasts. In response, the official Tesla Energy account on X stated that the report was “incorrect by a large margin.”
-
Elon Musk1 week agoSpaceX posts Starship booster feat that’s so nutty, it doesn’t even look real
-
Elon Musk7 days agoTesla Full Self-Driving gets an offer to be insured for ‘almost free’
-
News7 days agoElon Musk confirms Tesla FSD V14.2 will see widespread rollout
-
News1 week agoTesla is adding an interesting feature to its centerscreen in a coming update
-
News1 week agoTesla launches new interior option for Model Y
-
News1 week agoTesla widens rollout of new Full Self-Driving suite to more owners
-
Elon Musk1 week agoTesla CEO Elon Musk’s $1 trillion pay package hits first adversity from proxy firm
-
News6 days agoTesla might be doing away with a long-included feature with its vehicles







