News
DeepSpace: Virgin Galactic and Blue Origin banter about the fine print of suborbital tourism
Welcome to the sixth edition of our new newsletter, DeepSpace! Each Tuesday, I’ll be taking a deep-dive into the most exciting developments in commercial space, from satellites and rockets to everything in between. If you’d like to receive DeepSpace and all of our newsletters and membership benefits,
Just shy of two months into 2019, the new year has been marked by a distinct focus on human spaceflight. Most of that focus has centered (as it should) on the relatively imminent launch debut of both SpaceX’s Crew Dragon and Boeing’s Starliner, crewed spacecraft designed and built to carry astronauts into orbit for NASA.
However, beyond SpaceX and Boeing, a considerable amount of noise is being made about the labors and relative progress of companies like Blue Origin and Virgin Galactic, both primarily focused on building a suborbital tourism market with their New Shepard and SpaceShipTwo launch vehicles. Coming as no surprise from companies aiming to create a sustainable market for a very expensive consumer product, both products have been dragged through a torturous maze of marketing hype in a process that has not really done the serious endeavor of human spaceflight any favors.
The Shepard and the Ship
- Virgin Galactic’s launch vehicle provider The Spaceship Company has been working to develop a suborbital platform to launch humans since the early 2000s, incorporated after billionaire Paul Allen funded a group of companies that ultimately won the Ansari X Prize in 2004.
- The Virgin/TSC approach involves a carrier aircraft (Known as White Knight Two) and a much smaller rocket plane (SpaceShipTwo) that is carried up to ~30,000 feet (9 km) before dropping and igniting its engine.
- SpaceShipTwo is meant to reach a maximum altitude of around 300,000 feet (~90 km) at a top speed of roughly Mach 3 (1000 m/s, 2200 mph) before gliding back to land on the same runway.
- In 2014, a combination of bad aeronautical design and pilot error triggered the in-flight failure of the first SpaceShipTwo, killing one of its two pilots. A member of the NTSB board that investigated the failure stated that Scale Composites (one of TSC’s parent companies) “put all their eggs in the basket of the pilots [flying the vehicle] correctly.”
- In a February 2019 video, Virgin Galactic CEO George Whitesides noted that “many aircraft are moving to being less piloted over time [but] our vehicle really is piloted to space.”
- SpaceShipTwo most recently launched on February 22nd.
- Blue Origin has yet to launch an actual human on New Shepard, a small, reusable single-stage rocket designed to loft a separate passenger capsule to approximately 100 km (330,000 ft).
- New Shepard has conducted ten launches since its 2015 debut, most of which saw the crew capsule and booster approximately reach that nominal 100 km apogee and nine of which concluded with a successful landing of the rocket’s booster.
- Capable of carrying up to six passengers, the Crew Capsule features a built-in abort motor that has been successfully tested, as well as a parachute system for a relatively soft landing at end-of-mission.
“Spacecraft” and “astronauts”
- Aside from the generally impressive technology itself and the undeniable challenges and risks of launch humans on fueled rockets, both Blue Origin’s New Shepard and Virgin Galactic’s SpaceShipTwo exist – albeit with different weights – to cater to a new market, suborbital or “space” tourism.
- While NASA is taking advantage of the opportunities to test small experiments with both vehicles as a partial platform, the real goal of both vehicles is to routinely launch paying customers.
- While Blue Origin has yet to announce ticket pricing, Virgin Galactic has priced their offering at $250,000 per person. In both cases, the end result will likely be a six-figure sum in return for an experience that should last no more than 10-60 minutes from start to finish, excluding buildup from screening and whatever training is deemed necessary.
- In other words, short of cases involving charity, tickets on New Shepard and SpaceShipTwo will almost indefinitely be reserved for less than 1% of humanity, those with income around $1M or more per year. This is by no means a bad thing and is, in fact, a proven first or second step in the direction of democratizing exotic or expensive technologies like air travel, computers, and even electric cars (namely Teslas).
- However, both companies are laser-focused on branding their vehicles as spacecraft and their passengers as astronauts, with Virgin Galactic being the worst offender in this regard.
- Aside from literally calling its 600+ prospective customers “Future Astronauts”, Virgin Galactic uses every chance it gets to hammer home its claim that SpaceShipTwo is a commercial spacecraft and its pilots true licensed, “wing”-ed astronauts.
- While passengers are not eligible for official FAA ‘astronauts’ wings’, it appears that Virgin will continue to market its passenger experience as one where customers will get to ‘travel to space’ and more or less become astronauts.
- Blue Origin describes its commercial offering as a “reusable suborbital rocket system designed to take astronauts and research payloads past the Kármán line – the internationally recognized boundary of space.”
- Both Blue and Virgin flights offer about ~4 minutes of weighlessness between launch and landing.
-
- Virgin Galactic Makes Space for Second Time in Ten Weeks with Three On Board
-
-
-
- For context, Alan Shepard – the US test pilot and namesake of New Shepard – was launched to an altitude of almost 190 km (120 mi) for what was recognized as the first US “spaceflight” and spent something like 5-10 minutes in microgravity and above the Karman Line (100 km).
- Used as a rough measure for a sort of fixed, arbitrary boundary between “Earth” and “Space”, reasonable arguments have been made in the last few years that the 100 km Karman Line could more accurately be placed around 70-90 km, in which case Virgin Galactic might actually be technically correct when saying that SpaceShipTwo and its passengers are traveling to space.
- Fewer than 570 humans in all of history have visited space (> 100 km), around 99.5% of which were astronauts that reached orbit. To call pilots of a spaceplane as distinctly suborbital as SpaceShipOne “astronauts” is palatable, particularly given the risks they face as test subjects and test pilots.
- However, to even hinting that tourists riding New Shepard or SpaceShipTwo to altitudes of ~80-100 kilometers are astronauts would do an immense disservice to those that pushed the limits of technology, risked their lives, or even died in pursuit of orbital spaceflight, the only kind of spaceflight with any significant utility.
- Much like cruise ship customers are not under the impression that they are coming along to ‘become sailors’, suborbital tourists are not astronauts. That being said, it’s not inaccurate to describe the experience they will have the privilege of being part of as something truly extraordinary, given that they will become one of a very select few humans to have actually launched on a rocket or seen the exaggerated curvature of Earth’s limb against the blackness of space.
- SpaceX’s first attempted orbital launch of Crew Dragon – a spacecraft designed to transport astronauts to and from the International Space Station – is set to occur as early as 2:49 am EST/07:49 UTC on March 2nd.
- This is the first truly serious date, thanks to the successful completion of a critical pre-launch review conducted by NASA and SpaceX.
- The second launch of Falcon Heavy could occur as early as late March
- Aside from DM-1 and Falcon Heavy Flight 2, it’s unclear what SpaceX mission will happen next, although a West Coast launch (the Radarsat Constellation Mission) is a strong candidate.
Mission Updates |
Photos of the Week:
After successfully sending the world’s first commercial lunar lander on its way to the Moon and placing Indonesian communications satellite PSN-6 in a high-energy Earth orbit, Falcon 9 B1048 completed its third launch and landing and returned to port on February 24th. The booster’s fourth mission, a Crew Dragon in-flight abort test, will likely destroy B1048, making this its last successful recovery. (c. Tom Cross)
News
Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.2.2.5 might be the most confusing release ever
With each Full Self-Driving release, I am realistic. I know some things are going to get better, and I know some things will regress slightly. However, these instances of improvements are relatively mild, as are the regressions. Yet, this version has shown me that it contains extremes of both.
Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.2.2.5 hit my car back on Valentine’s Day, February 14, and since I’ve had it, it has become, in my opinion, the most confusing release I’ve ever had.
With each Full Self-Driving release, I am realistic. I know some things are going to get better, and I know some things will regress slightly. However, these instances of improvements are relatively mild, as are the regressions. Yet, this version has shown me that it contains extremes of both.
It has been about three weeks of driving on v14.2.2.5; I’ve used it for nearly every mile traveled since it hit my car. I’ve taken short trips of 10 minutes or less, I’ve taken medium trips of an hour or less, and I’ve taken longer trips that are over 100 miles per leg and are over two hours of driving time one way.
These are my thoughts on it thus far:
Speed Profiles Are a Mixed Bag
Speed Profiles are something Tesla seems to tinker with quite frequently, and each version tends to show a drastic difference in how each one behaves compared to the previous version.
I do a vast majority of my FSD travel using Standard and Hurry modes, although in bad weather, I will scale it back to Chill, and when it’s a congested city on a weekend or during rush hour, I’ll throw it into Mad Max so it takes what it needs.
Early on, Speed Profiles really felt great. This is one of those really subjective parts of the FSD where someone might think one mode travels too quickly, whereas another person might see the identical performance as too slow or just right.
To me, I would like to see more consistency from release to release on them, but overall, things are pretty good. There are no real complaints on my end, as I had with previous releases.
In a past release, Mad Max traveled under the speed limit quite frequently, and I only had that experience because Hurry was acting the same way. I’ve had no instances of that with v14.2.2.5.
Strange Turn Signal Behavior
This is the first Full Self-Driving version where I’ve had so many weird things happen with the turn signals.
Two things come to mind: Using a turn signal on a sharp turn, and ignoring the navigation while putting the wrong turn signal on. I’ve encountered both things on v14.2.2.5.
On my way to the Supercharger, I take a road that has one semi-sharp right-hand turn with a driveway entrance right at the beginning of the turn.
Only recently, with the introduction of v14.2.2.5, have I had FSD put on the right turn signal when going around this turn. It’s obviously a minor issue, but it still happens, and it’s not standard practice:
How can we get Full Self-Driving to stop these turn signals?
There’s no need to use one here; the straight path is a driveway, not a public road. The right turn signal here is unnecessary pic.twitter.com/7uLDHnqCfv
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) February 28, 2026
When sharing this on X, I had Tesla fans (the ones who refuse to acknowledge that the company can make mistakes) tell me that it’s a “valid” behavior that would be taught to anyone who has been “professionally trained” to drive.
Apparently, if you complain about this turn signal, you are also claiming you know more than Tesla engineers…okay.
Nobody in their right mind has ever gone around a sharp turn when driving their car and put on a signal when continuing on the same road. You would put a left turn signal on to indicate you were turning into that driveway if that’s what your intention was.
Like I said, it’s a totally minor issue. However, it’s not really needed, and nor is it normal. If I were in the car with someone who was taking a simple turn on a road they were traveling, and they signaled because the turn was sharp, I’d be scratching my head.
I’ve also had three separate instances of the car completely ignoring the navigation and putting on a signal that is opposite to what the routing says. Really quite strange.
Parking Performance is Still Underwhelming
Parking has been a complaint of mine with FSD for a long time, so much so that it is pretty rare that I allow the vehicle to park itself. More often than not, it is because I want to pick a spot that is relatively isolated.
However, in the times I allow it to pull into a spot, it still does some pretty head-scratching things.
Recently, it tried to back into a spot that was ~60% covered in plowed snow. The snow was piled about six feet high in a Target parking lot.
A few days later, it tried backing into a spot where someone failed the universal litmus test of returning their shopping cart. Both choices were baffling and required me to manually move the car to a different portion of the lot.
I used Autopark on both occasions, and it did a great job of getting into the spot. I notice that the parking performance when I manually choose the spot is much better than when the car does the entire parking process, meaning choosing the spot and parking in it.
It’s Doing Things (For Me) It’s Never Done Before
Two things that FSD has never done before, at least for me, are slow down in School Zones and avoid deer. The first is something I usually take over manually, and the second I surprisingly have not had to deal with yet.
I had my Tesla slow down at a school zone yesterday for the first time, traveling at 20 MPH and not 15 MPH as the sign suggested, but at the speed of other cars in the School Zone. This was impressive and the first time I experienced it.
I would like to see this more consistently, and I think School Zones should be one of those areas where, no matter what, FSD will only travel the speed limit.
Last night, FSD v14.2.2.5 recognized a deer in a roadside field and slowed down for it:
🚨 Cruising home on a rainy, foggy evening and my Tesla on Full Self-Driving begins to slow down suddenly
FSD just wanted Mr. Deer to make it home to his deer family ❤️ pic.twitter.com/cAeqVDgXo5
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) March 4, 2026
Navigation Still SUCKS
Navigation will be a complaint until Tesla proves it can fix it. For now, it’s just terrible.
It still has not figured out how to leave my neighborhood. I give it the opportunity to prove me wrong each time I leave my house, and it just can’t do it.
It always tries to go out of the primary entrance/exit of the neighborhood when the route needs to take me left, even though that exit is a right turn only. I always leave a voice prompt for Tesla about it.
It still picks incredibly baffling routes for simple navigation. It’s the one thing I still really want Tesla to fix.
Investor's Corner
Tesla gets tip of the hat from major Wall Street firm on self-driving prowess
“Tesla is at the forefront of autonomous driving, supported by a camera-only approach that is technically harder but much cheaper than the multi-sensor systems widely used in the industry. This strategy should allow Tesla to scale more profitably compared to Robotaxi competitors, helped by a growing data engine from its existing fleet,” BoA wrote.
Tesla received a tip of the hat from major Wall Street firm Bank of America on Wednesday, as it reinitiated coverage on Tesla shares with a bullish stance that comes with a ‘Buy’ rating and a $460 price target.
In a new note that marks a sharp reversal from its neutral position earlier in 2025, the bank declared Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (FSD) technology the “leading consumer autonomy solution.”
Analysts highlighted Tesla’s camera-only architecture, known as Tesla Vision, as a strategic masterstroke. While technically more challenging than the multi-sensor setups favored by rivals, the vision-based approach is dramatically cheaper to produce and maintain.
This cost edge, combined with Tesla’s rapidly expanding real-world data engine, positions the company to scale robotaxis far more profitably than competitors, BofA argues in the new note:
“Tesla is at the forefront of autonomous driving, supported by a camera-only approach that is technically harder but much cheaper than the multi-sensor systems widely used in the industry. This strategy should allow Tesla to scale more profitably compared to Robotaxi competitors, helped by a growing data engine from its existing fleet.”
The bank now attributes roughly 52% of Tesla’s total valuation to its Robotaxi ambitions. It also flagged meaningful upside from the Optimus humanoid robot program and the fast-growing energy storage business, suggesting the auto segment’s recent headwinds, including expired incentives, are being eclipsed by these higher-margin opportunities.
Tesla’s own data underscores exactly why Wall Street is waking up to FSD’s potential. According to Tesla’s official safety reporting page, the FSD Supervised fleet has now surpassed 8.4 billion cumulative miles driven.
Tesla FSD (Supervised) fleet passes 8.4 billion cumulative miles
That total ballooned from just 6 million miles in 2021 to 80 million in 2022, 670 million in 2023, 2.25 billion in 2024, and a staggering 4.25 billion in 2025 alone. In the first 50 days of 2026, owners added another 1 billion miles — averaging more than 20 million miles per day.
This avalanche of real-world, camera-captured footage, much of it on complex city streets, gives Tesla an unmatched training dataset. Every mile feeds its neural networks, accelerating improvement cycles that lidar-dependent rivals simply cannot match at scale.
Tesla owners themselves will tell you the suite gets better with every release, bringing new features and improvements to its self-driving project.
The $460 target implies roughly 15 percent upside from recent trading levels around $400. While regulatory and safety hurdles remain, BofA’s endorsement signals growing institutional conviction that Tesla’s data advantage is not hype; it’s a tangible moat already delivering billions of miles of proof.
News
Tesla to discuss expansion of Samsung AI6 production plans: report
Tesla has reportedly requested an additional 24,000 wafers per month, which would bring total production capacity to around 40,000 wafers if finalized.
Tesla is reportedly discussing an expansion of its next-generation AI chip supply deal with Samsung Electronics.
As per a report from Korean industry outlet The Elec, Tesla purchasing executives are reportedly scheduled to meet Samsung officials this week to negotiate additional production volume for the company’s upcoming AI6 chip.
Industry sources cited in the report stated that Tesla is pushing to increase the production volume of its AI6 chip, which will be manufactured using Samsung’s 2-nanometer process.
Tesla previously signed a long-term foundry agreement with Samsung covering AI6 production through December 31, 2033. The deal was reportedly valued at about 22.8 trillion won (roughly $16–17 billion).
Under the existing agreement, Tesla secured approximately 16,000 wafers per month from the facility. The company has reportedly requested an additional 24,000 wafers per month, which would bring total production capacity to around 40,000 wafers if finalized.
Tesla purchasing executives are expected to discuss detailed supply terms during their visit to Samsung this week.
The AI6 chip is expected to support several Tesla technologies. Industry sources stated that the chip could be used for the company’s Full Self-Driving system, the Optimus humanoid robot, and Tesla’s internal AI data centers.
The report also indicated that AI6 clusters could replace the role previously planned for Tesla’s Dojo AI supercomputer. Instead of a single system, multiple AI6 chips would be combined into server-level clusters.
Tesla’s semiconductor collaboration with Samsung dates back several years. Samsung participated in the design of Tesla’s HW3 (AI3) chip and manufactured it using a 14-nanometer process. The HW4 chip currently used in Tesla vehicles was also produced by Samsung using a 5-nanometer node.
Tesla previously planned to split production of its AI5 chip between Samsung and TSMC. However, the company reportedly chose Samsung as the primary partner for the newer AI6 chip.
Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.2.2.5 might be the most confusing release ever
Tesla gets tip of the hat from major Wall Street firm on self-driving prowess
