News
SpaceX rideshare program beats small rockets for Emirati launch contract
The United Arab Emirates’ (UAE) space agency has contracted with SpaceX to launch a domestically-built Earth observation satellite on a Falcon 9 rideshare mission.
Known as MBZ SAT, the ~700 kg (~1550 lb) spacecraft will be the second domestic imaging satellite (mostly) built by the UAE itself and, among several other upgrades, will nearly double its resolving power from KhalifaSat’s 0.7m/pixel to ~0.4m/pixel – not far off from the unclassified state of the art. To develop such an advanced domestic capability is no small task and based on similarly sized and capable spacecraft from the US and Europe, MBZ SAT development and the first flightworthy satellite could easily cost $100 million or more.
That makes the mission a bit of a jewel in the crown of SpaceX’s Smallsat Rideshare Program, which is intentionally branded as a more hands-off, public-transit-like utility that offers extremely low prices at the cost of more traditional white-glove launch services.
For a direct contract with SpaceX itself, the Smallsat Rideshare Program charges a minimum of $1 million to launch up to 200 kg (440 lb) on one payload adapter. Anything beyond that 200 kg mark costs the same, so twice the payload on the same adapter would cost exactly twice as much. For a fee, SpaceX also offers fueling services and gives customers the option of buying SpaceX-built adapters and deployment mechanisms or bringing their own.
Buying from SpaceX, that makes the Smallsat Program optimal for spacecraft between about 50 kg and 500 kg. For truly tiny satellites, third-party launch service providers like Exolaunch and Spaceflight purchase several-hundred-kilogram slots for self-built adapters that can host a handful to dozens of cubesats and nanosats. In that sense, the way SpaceX has structured its Smallsat Program almost mirrors large-scale shipping. SpaceX simply offers space on its ‘ship,’ leaving it mostly up to the customers to worry about their ‘containers.’ Some customers might need all or most of a container to themselves – an optimal outcome. Others might have goods that barely fill a fraction of a container and have to either find other customers to partner with or a third-party logistics company that works to slot a bunch of small payloads together to maximize efficiency and minimize shipping costs.
With the right balance, most common customer needs and budgets can be catered to with the same program and on the same ship or launch. That includes outliers like MZB SAT, which can be equated to an ultra-expensive hypercar that needs special handling and a container all to itself. In this case, it’s likely that SpaceX will go above and beyond to accommodate the UAE’s particular needs and be extra cognizant of the gap between MZB SAT and the Transporter mission’s other rideshare payloads.
Above all else, MZB SAT is almost perfectly sized and destined for the perfect orbit (500 km or 310 mi) to be launched on one of several new small rockets that could be operational by H2 2023. That list includes Firefly’s Alpha, Relativity’s Terran 1, ABL Space’s RS1, and several other vehicles specifically designed to launch small satellites in the 300-1000 kg range. For a premium over rideshare space on larger rockets, a dedicated launch does tend to include more hands-on service, greater schedule flexibility, and a ride to the optimal orbit.
However, SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket ultimately won over the UAE, firmly demonstrating that industry-best pricing paired with the most reliable rocket currently flying is a hard combination to beat.
News
Tesla’s Apple CarPlay ambitions are not dead, they’re still in the works
For what it’s worth, as a Tesla owner, I don’t particularly see the need for CarPlay, as I have found the in-car system that the company has developed to be superior. However, many people are in love with CarPlay simply because, when it’s in a car that is capable, it is really great.
Tesla’s Apple CarPlay ambitions appeared to be dead in the water after a large amount of speculation late last year that the company would add the user interface seemed to cool down after several weeks of reports.
However, it appears that CarPlay might make its way to Tesla vehicles after all, as a recent report seems to indicate that it is still being worked on by software teams for the company.
The real question is whether it is truly needed or if it is just a want by so many owners that Tesla is listening and deciding to proceed with its development.
Back in November, Bloomberg reported that Tesla was in the process of testing Apple CarPlay within its vehicles, which was a major development considering the company had resisted adopting UIs outside of its own for many years.
Nearly one-third of car buyers considered the lack of CarPlay as a deal-breaker when buying their cars, a study from McKinsey & Co. outlined. This could be a driving decision in Tesla’s inability to abandon the development of CarPlay in its vehicles, especially as it lost a major advantage that appealed to consumers last year: the $7,500 EV tax credit.
Tesla owners propose interesting theory about Apple CarPlay and EV tax credit
Although we saw little to no movement on it since the November speculation, Tesla is now reportedly in the process of still developing the user interface. Mark Gurman, a Bloomberg writer with a weekly newsletter, stated that CarPlay is “still in the works” at Tesla and that more concrete information will be available “soon” regarding its development.
While Tesla already has a very capable and widely accepted user interface, CarPlay would still be an advantage, considering many people have used it in their vehicles for years. Just like smartphones, many people get comfortable with an operating system or style and are resistant to using a new one. This could be a big reason for Tesla attempting to get it in their own cars.
Tesla gets updated “Apple CarPlay” hack that can work on new models
For what it’s worth, as a Tesla owner, I don’t particularly see the need for CarPlay, as I have found the in-car system that the company has developed to be superior. However, many people are in love with CarPlay simply because, when it’s in a car that is capable, it is really great.
It holds one distinct advantage over Tesla’s UI in my opinion, and that’s the ability to read and respond to text messages, which is something that is available within a Tesla, but is not as user-friendly.
With that being said, I would still give CarPlay a shot in my Tesla. I didn’t particularly enjoy it in my Bronco Sport, but that was because Ford’s software was a bit laggy with it. If it were as smooth as Tesla’s UI, which I think it would be, it could be a really great addition to the vehicle.
With the launch of a new trim level for the Model Y last night, something almost went unnoticed — the loss of a moniker that Tesla just recently added to a couple of its variants of the all-electric crossover.
Tesla launched the Model Y All-Wheel-Drive last night, competitively priced at $41,990, but void of the luxurious features that are available within the Premium trims.
Upon examination of the car, one thing was missing, and it was noticeable: Tesla dropped the use of the “Standard” moniker to identify its entry-level offerings of the Model Y.
The Standard Model Y vehicles were introduced late last year, primarily to lower the entry price after the U.S. EV tax credit changes were made. Tesla stripped some features like the panoramic glass roof, premium audio, ambient lighting, acoustic-lined glass, and some of the storage.
Last night, it simply switched the configurations away from “Standard” and simply as the Model Y Rear-Wheel-Drive and Model Y All-Wheel-Drive.
There are three plausible reasons for this move, and while it is minor, there must be an answer for why Tesla chose to abandon the name, yet keep the “Premium” in its upper-level offerings.
“Standard” carried a negative connotation in marketing
Words like “Standard” can subtly imply “basic,” “bare-bones,” or “cheap” to consumers, especially when directly contrasted with “Premium” on the configurator or website. Dropping it avoids making the entry-level Model Y feel inferior or low-end, even though it’s designed for affordability.
Tesla likely wanted the base trim to sound neutral and spec-focused (e.g., just “RWD” highlights drivetrain rather than feature level), while “Premium” continues to signal desirable upgrades, encouraging upsells to higher-margin variants.
Simplifying the overall naming structure for less confusion
The initial “Standard vs. Premium” split (plus Performance) created a somewhat clunky hierarchy, especially as Tesla added more variants like Standard Long Range in some markets or the new AWD base.
Removing “Standard” streamlines things to a more straightforward progression (RWD → AWD → Premium RWD/AWD → Performance), making the lineup easier to understand at a glance. This aligns with Tesla’s history of iterative naming tweaks to reduce buyer hesitation.
Elevating brand perception and protecting perceived value
Keeping “Premium” reinforces that the bulk of the Model Y lineup (especially the popular Long Range models) remains a premium product with desirable features like better noise insulation, upgraded interiors, and tech.
Eliminating “Standard” prevents any dilution of the Tesla brand’s upscale image—particularly important in a competitive EV market—while the entry-level variants can quietly exist as accessible “RWD/AWD” options without drawing attention to them being decontented versions.
You can check out the differences between the “Standard” and “Premium” Model Y vehicles below:
@teslarati There are some BIG differences between the Tesla Model Y Standard and Tesla Model Y Premium #tesla #teslamodely ♬ Sia – Xeptemper
Elon Musk
Tesla bull sees odds rising of Tesla merger after Musk confirms SpaceX-xAI deal
Dan Ives of Wedbush Securities wrote on Tuesday that there is a growing chance Tesla could be merged in some form with SpaceX and xAI over the next 12 to 18 months.
A prominent Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) bull has stated that the odds are rising that Tesla could eventually merge with SpaceX and xAI, following Elon Musk’s confirmation that the private space company has combined with his artificial intelligence startup.
Dan Ives of Wedbush Securities wrote on Tuesday that there is a growing chance Tesla could be merged in some form with SpaceX and xAI over the next 12 to 18 months.
“In our view there is a growing chance that Tesla will eventually be merged in some form into SpaceX/xAI over time. The view is this growing AI ecosystem will focus on Space and Earth together…..and Musk will look to combine forces,” Ives wrote in a post on X.
Ives’ comments followed confirmation from Elon Musk late Monday that SpaceX has merged with xAI. Musk stated that the merger creates a vertically integrated platform that combines AI, rockets, satellite internet, communications, and real-time data.
In a post on SpaceX’s official website, Elon Musk added that the combined company is aimed at enabling space-based AI compute, stating that within two to three years, space could become the lowest-cost environment for generating AI processing power. The transaction reportedly values the combined SpaceX-xAI entity at roughly $1.25 trillion.
Tesla, for its part, has already increased its exposure to xAI, announcing a $2 billion investment in the startup last week in its Q4 and FY 2025 update letter.
While merger speculation has intensified, notable complications could emerge if SpaceX/xAI does merge with Tesla, as noted in a report from Investors Business Daily.
SpaceX holds major U.S. government contracts, including with the Department of Defense and NASA, and xAI’s Grok is being used by the U.S. Department of War. Tesla, for its part, maintains extensive operations in China through Gigafactory Shanghai and its Megapack facility.
Tesla’s Apple CarPlay ambitions are not dead, they’re still in the works
Tesla brings closure to Model Y moniker with launch of new trim level
