Connect with us

SpaceX

There are many challenges involved in a mission to Mars. What are they and what technology is SpaceX working on to address them?

Published

on

Dragon to Mars | Credit: SpaceX
Credit: SpaceX

The concept of sending humans to Mars has been an exciting idea for decades, and the direction of space travel in the 21st century is finally presenting the possibility of actually making that happen. Of course, once everyone let the seriousness of such a journey sink in, the question of feasibility has inevitably come to the table for open discussion with the goal of finding realistic solutions.

It’s interesting enough to simply review the missions of all the Mars hopefuls (Part 1), but now that the reviews are in, it’s the details that are driving the discussion. After all, even the casual observer knows that deep space travel presents challenges such as long-term zero gravity and the ever-popular doom-and-gloom danger of cosmic radiation.

[Say that last one in a loud, booming voice for extra effect.]

Before breaking down any specifics, I want to acknowledge that there’s more than just a twelve-step program to getting to Mars (twelve being the obligatory “go-to” number). It requires an entire infrastructure of capabilities that build upon and support one another. However, I’m taking a leap of faith by assuming that inevitably anyone making a successful trip to Mars will have partnerships in place to tap into such an infrastructure. It’s the larger components of the specific missions that I’m focusing on here.

Advertisement

Outlining the Challenges for a Mission to Mars

Credit: NASA

Credit: NASA

NASA has a dedicated “Space Technology Mission Directorate” (STMD) charged with developing the capabilities needed to achieve the missions and goals NASA is given.

With the red planet as one of the big missions of the day (meaning Mars obviously, although Pluto has also been determined to be red), there’s no shortage of PowerPoints, panels, and interviews to source for what’s being worked on. I’ll follow their lead for discussion.

Transportation

Credit: SpaceX

Falcon 9 launch | Credit: SpaceX

First and foremost, in order to explore Mars, we’ve got to get there and (arguably) back. Depending on the length of stay and mission purpose, the cargo needs are going to play a part in the “how” part of this puzzle piece. Small stuff, no sweat (relative to general space traveler sweat levels). Big stuff? Now we’ve got issues.

Propulsion

Propulsion has been an interesting discussion to watch from the sidelines, mainly due to the debate over the types of systems available versus the types of systems thought to be needed. General mission discussions tend towards a six to eight month flight time each way plus a year and a half or so on the surface, but there are those advocating for shorter flight times to mitigate hazard exposure and reduce cargo needs.

Current rocket fuels can speed things along, but only at the expense of high fuel consumption. Nuclear fusion (and fission) systems are in the works which would theoretically reduce the flight time to Mars to approximately three months, but the timeframe needed to fully develop and test such new technologies isn’t a big crowd pleaser.

The methane-based nature of SpaceX’s Raptor engine for their speculated Mars Colonial Transport doesn’t really lend either way to this debate because using methane is a choice surrounding resource availability rather than power levels. Since methane can be harvested and manufactured on Mars, it reduces the need to carry as much fuel from Earth on missions, thus lowering costs. Methane-based fuel generation is also one of the key parts of the Mars Society’s “Mars Direct” proposal.

Advertisement

Entry, Descent, and Landing

Given the fact that we’ve sent several rovers to Mars already, it might be surprising that getting a craft from orbit to the Martian surface is actually a huge challenge. A quick survey of our recent history certainly makes the case for landing to be a non-issue, so what’s the deal?

Credit: NASA

Apollo landing module | Credit: NASA

Yes, we land heavy things on Earth all the time, but we do so with an atmosphere about 99% thicker than the one on Mars. The lack of air pressure and wind on Mars means that there isn’t any real air resistance to aid in slowing down a massive descending craft nor is there any wind to tap into for a glider or parachute to be very effective.

What about the moon?

There’s virtually no atmosphere there, either, yet we landed quite a bit of cargo during the Apollo program. That explanation would be gravity. The moon has less than half the gravity that Mars does, which is less than 20% that of Earth. The difference in power required to land a crew module on the moon vs. Mars could maybe be compared to landing a mini Falcon 9 with a micro drone onto a piece of plywood in the middle of a swimming pool versus dropping, say, a child-sized Tesla Model S. Maybe not, but it’s fun to think about. So cute…

In 2012, NASA landed the rover “Curiosity” on the Martian surface using a very complicated parachute-plus-propulsion crane system. The existence of such technology somewhat gives the impression that landing things on Mars is already a solved problem. If what we’re landing is about the mass of a small car, this impression is true, but if we are landing anything significantly larger, such as a capsule carrying humans for example, then the problem is still a problem as larger masses require greater counterforce to slow down their descent.

Advertisement

SpaceX Gives Back

SpaceX_Thaicomm8_First-Stage-Landing

Falcon 9 first stage landing | Credit: SpaceX

SpaceX’s focus on developing propulsive landing systems is aiming to solve the problem of counterforce. This is actually an area where SpaceX is supporting NASA’s Journey to Mars (instead of the other way around) via the data obtained from their Falcon 9 landings to date. One of NASA’s proposed solutions is a “supersonic retropropulsion” system, meaning periodic firing of the engines on a craft to counter the speed resulting from a trip through the (small) Martian atmosphere. To date, NASA hasn’t been able to test this type of technology in an environment similar to what would be encountered on Mars whereas SpaceX has. By studying the results of SpaceX’s Falcon 9 first stage landings, NASA can use the information gathered for their retropropulsive system designs.

Back scratchers, unite!

Crew Systems

Credit: SDASM Archives

Apollo capsule in clean room | Credit: SDASM Archives

The crew ships under development for taking astronauts to Mars have a number of requirements to meet to be successful transports, and from the information available thus far, their progress seems to be moving along swimmingly. SpaceX’s Crew Dragon has been announced with photos and basic details provided, and NASA’s Orion capsule has enjoyed a marketing campaign providing numerous details for quite some time now.

SpaceX_Dragon-Capsule

Dragon capsule during hover test | Credit: SpaceX

The primary improvements in both capsule designs over the Apollo age seem to be more room, better heat shields, better software, and glass cockpits (i.e., touch screens). Crew Dragon can also hover (eventually landing) and blast off from its rocket transport in an emergency event. The aesthetics are pretty swank as well. Why isn’t there anything vastly different from what we’ve already done?

If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.

Crew Cargo & Environmental Systems

Environmental systems and supplies to keep human travelers alive and (mostly) happy have been generally worked out via prior orbital missions, especially on the long-term International Space Station (ISS) ones. However, there are a few added “catches” that a mission to Mars throws in.

Credit: NASA on The Commons

ISS | Credit: NASA on The Commons

First, the ISS is able to maintain long-term human crews due to regular cargo resupply missions. The travel distance for Mars-bound astronauts will render such types of delivery schedules unavailable. No cargo deliveries mean carrying all the cargo required for the entire trip, something that generally demands multiple rocket launches for supply assembly before heading out.

Other than the higher expense of multiple launches, this seems to just be a matter of logistics and cost effectiveness rather than capability. SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy was certainly designed with these cargo requirements in mind considering the power packed into its engines.

Advertisement

Second, life support system technology has been developed and advanced over the years on the ISS, but it requires a lot of maintenance to upkeep. Perhaps the life support systems on the new crew capsules will endure for longer than the systems on the ISS as they have the data available to design around, but in the event that upkeep is just a fact of life that can’t be prevented, crews will surely undergo the training to perform repairs as needed as they are now.

As development in the space industry continues, these issues may become minimal. For instance, short-term resupply missions could eventually become available as travel time to Mars decreases with more efficient and powerful propulsion systems. The development of photon propulsion via lasers is ongoing, the goal being to accelerate around 220 pounds of unmanned spacecraft to 25% the speed of light for a three-day trip to Mars. That could almost translate into a sort of Mars-based Amazon Prime. I see what you’re up to, Jeff Bezos!

SpaceX also plans on making regular cargo missions to Mars a bi-annual affair, so as long as supplies and equipment can last for the 26-month(ish) window between launches, it’s Mars-certified.

Zero Gravity Impacts

Credit: NASA on The Commons

Astronaut Ed White on a spacewalk | Credit: NASA on The Commons

When astronauts return from long-term zero gravity, their bodies have to acclimate after changes despite attempts to mitigate the effects through exercise regimens. If you’re just going from Earth to space and then Earth again, no big deal really. But going from Earth to space and then Mars? There won’t be a team of medical professionals ready to drag the astronauts out of the capsule and tell them to take it easy for a while.

That’s kind of an amusing image, actually. The Red Dragon capsule lands but everyone inside is all laid out looking like they are badly hungover from the prior night’s club hopping. Throw in some glitter for Instagram? Sorry, I’m digressing…

Advertisement

What exactly are the effects of long-term zero gravity on the human body? According to NASA, muscles (including the heart) can atrophy at a rate of 5% per week, bones at 1% per month, and about 22% of blood volume is lost. These are generally recoverable, but it takes about as long to recover a muscle as it did to lose it, and bone can take two to three years to grow back if it does at all. The lower Mars gravity would probably mean an easier recovery process, but there’s still a process involved and the entire crew is affected. Not even regular exercise can mimic all of the (needed) effects that gravity has on the body.

Credit: NASA on The Commons

Space colony concept art | Credit: NASA on The Commons

The concept of using a rotating space craft to mitigate this problem is seen so often in movies and space habitat designs that one might think it’s a “given” that some version of it will be used for Mars travel. In fact, The Mars Society’s “Mars Direct” plan even advocates for a rotating craft which uses the spent upper stage of the rocket as an anchor to spin the crew capsule around for artificial gravity simulation.

Since nothing looked like it would “spin” on the Dragon and Falcon Heavy media releases nor did there seem to be much room for a treadmill, I was really curious about what SpaceX’s answer to long term zero gravity was. From what I’ve read, it isn’t seen as a real problem or “show stopper”, if you will. Again, I’m missing a direct source to cite for any Elon or SpaceX comment on the issue, but from commentary around the web, it seems that the issue has surfaced in public discussions with no particular technology addressed to overcome it.

Perhaps this is one more thing we will see come September when SpaceX’s Mars Colonial Transporter plans are revealed. I can’t imagine that one hundred body-worn, space-traveling colonists wouldn’t be a problem needing to be addressed.

Surface Power

When it comes to any sort of space travel, solar seems to be one of the “go to” choices for power sourcing outside of propulsion. Unfortunately, when it comes to Mars exploration, solar power alone may not be enough. For one thing, Mars receives less than half the sunlight that Earth does, and most of that sunlight is only available in certain regions of the planet such as around the equator. Frequent light-blocking dust storms are also a problem. NASA’s STMD has outlined advanced batteries, regenerative fuel cells, fission nuclear systems, and solar arrays as the choice technologies for development in the area of surface power.

Advertisement
Nuclear power on Mars? | Credit: US National Archives

Nuclear power plant | Credit: US National Archives

Now, I admit that I don’t have all the time in the world to watch every Elon Musk video in existence (although I do enjoy the convenience of a YouTube channel with nearly all of them compiled), but I haven’t had much luck finding original sources of either Elon or a SpaceX executive directly commenting on the subject of surface power. I’m sure something is out there either eluding me or that I’ve forgotten I’ve seen.

Crew Dragon uses solar arrays attached to its trunk during flight for power, but the trunk is jettisoned prior to reentry (or entry when talking about Mars). I could make an educated guess based on the connections between Elon Musk and Solar City, Tesla, and the methane-based Raptor engines to presuppose that solar power, advanced batteries, and methane fuel generation are part of SpaceX’s surface power plans, but in the end it’s just a guess. Also, if Raptor is using a methane-based fuel because it can be resourced outside of Earth, I’d imagine that surface power would tie into that same manufacturing capability.

Credit: NASA on The Commons

ISS solar panels | Credit: NASA on The Commons

Mars One plans to utilize solar power for its surface power needs, specifically “thin film solar photovoltaic panels”. There isn’t much detail about their required panel size available, only that they should have the ability to be rolled up and transported elsewhere if need be. Finally, as I mentioned previously, the “Mars Direct” plan advocates tapping into fuel generation structures that manufactures a Methane-Oxygen bi-propellant.

Overall, it seems everyone is likely on a similar page regarding power sources – nothing crazy or unheard of, unless you think nuclear anything is too risky.

Coming Up on Countdown to Mars…

Credit: NASA on The Commons

Wernher von Braun and Walt Disney | Credit: NASA on The Commons

Cosmic space radiation! There’s so much on this topic, it’s worth an entire piece on its own. Spoiler alert: Elon doesn’t seem to be worried about that issue. Why not?

Also, stay tuned for a (theoretical) discussion on future Martian government…

Did you know that Werner von Braun had a fictional tale of a Martian society wherein the elected Martian leader was called “The Elon”? It’s almost as though he really did take a trip on that Nazi time traveling bell thing

Advertisement

Accidental computer geek, fascinated by most history and the multiplanetary future on its way. Quite keen on the democratization of space. | It's pronounced day-sha, but I answer to almost any variation thereof.

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

Elon Musk reveals how SpaceX is always on board Air Force One

Musk confirmed Tuesday that Starlink internet is live and kicking on Air Force One. Responding with a simple “Yup!” to a post showing him and Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang aboard the presidential jet en route to Beijing with President Trump, Musk proved the point: America’s most important aircraft now has seamless, high-speed satellite connectivity—even over the middle of the Pacific.

Published

on

elon musk and donald trump in front of a tesla cybertruck at the white house
President Donald J. Trump purchases a Tesla on the South Lawn, Tuesday, March 11, 2025. (Official White House Photo by Molly Riley)

Air Force One, the official call sign for a U.S. Air Force aircraft carrying the President, now runs on SpaceX Starlink, CEO Elon Musk revealed.

Musk confirmed Tuesday that Starlink internet is live and kicking on Air Force One. Responding with a simple “Yup!” to a post showing him and Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang aboard the presidential jet en route to Beijing with President Trump, Musk proved the point: America’s most important aircraft now has seamless, high-speed satellite connectivity—even over the middle of the Pacific.

Advertisement

The timing couldn’t be more symbolic. With trillion-dollar CEOs and the President sharing the cabin, Starlink wasn’t just a nice-to-have—it was mission-critical. No more spotty signals or dropped calls. Instead, real-time video conferences, secure data transfers, and global coordination at Mach speed.

Starlink’s aviation push has already transformed commercial and private flying. Dozens of major airlines have signed on or begun rollouts.

Hawaiian Airlines, United Airlines, Qatar Airways, Air France, SAS, WestJet, airBaltic, and Emirates (now equipping its Boeing 777 and A380 fleets) offer Starlink Wi-Fi to passengers. Lufthansa plans to follow in late 2026.

On private jets, the upgrade is even hotter: owners and charter companies report skyrocketing demand because Starlink turns cabins into flying boardrooms.

Advertisement

Starlink gets its latest airline adoptee for stable and reliable internet access

The advantages are massive. Traditional in-flight Wi-Fi relied on slow, high-latency geostationary satellites or ground-based systems that cut out over oceans and remote areas. Starlink’s low-Earth-orbit constellation delivers blazing speeds—often exceeding 200 Mbps download with latency as low as 25-60 milliseconds—gate-to-gate, from takeoff to landing.

Passengers stream 4K video, join Zoom calls, or work in the cloud without buffering. Pilots get real-time weather, NOTAM updates, and live ATC data. Even private-jet travelers get the benefits, as it means productivity that rivals the office.

On Air Force One, those benefits become strategic superpowers. The presidential aircraft demands unbreakable communications for national security, diplomacy, and crisis response. Starlink provides global coverage with no dead zones, offering redundancy against traditional systems that could fail in contested airspace or during long-haul flights.

Advertisement

It enables the President and staff to maintain secure links with the Pentagon, allies, or business leaders anywhere on Earth. During the Beijing trip, it likely facilitated direct coordination on trade, tech, and AI—proving the system’s reliability for the highest-stakes missions.

Critics once dismissed Starlink as a rich-person toy or military experiment. Now, it’s the backbone of commercial fleets, private aviation, and the world’s most visible symbol of American power, and it is providing stable internet to travelers.

With over 2,000 commercial aircraft committed and private-jet installations booming, Starlink is rewriting the rules of connected flight, and it seems like each week, a new airline is choosing to use it for on-flight connectivity.

For Air Force One, it’s more than faster Wi-Fi. It’s uninterrupted command-and-control in an increasingly connected world—ensuring the President never has to go dark at altitude. Elon Musk just made sure of it.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Elon Musk

SpaceX unveils sweeping Starship V3 upgrades ahead of May 19 launch

SpaceX has released a detailed list of changes for Starship Version 3, the next iteration of its fully reusable super-heavy-lift vehicle. Scheduled for its maiden flight as early as May 19 from Starbase in Texas, Starship V3 incorporates dozens of redesigns across the Super Heavy booster, Starship upper stage, Raptor 3 engines, and Launch Pad 2.

Published

on

SpaceX Starship V3 from Starbase, Texas on April 14, 2026
SpaceX Starship V3 from Starbase, Texas on April 14, 2026

SpaceX has unveiled sweeping upgrades to its Starship v3 rocket ahead of the upcoming May 19 launch.

SpaceX has released a detailed list of changes for Starship Version 3, the next iteration of its fully reusable super-heavy-lift vehicle. Scheduled for its maiden flight as early as May 19 from Starbase in Texas, Starship V3 incorporates dozens of redesigns across the Super Heavy booster, Starship upper stage, Raptor 3 engines, and Launch Pad 2.

Elon Musk reveals date of SpaceX Starship v3’s maiden voyage

The updates focus on simplification, mass reduction, reliability, and enabling core capabilities like rapid reusability, in-orbit refueling, Starlink deployment, and crewed missions to the Moon and Mars.

Advertisement

Collectively, these modifications mark a major step-change. By reducing dry mass, improving thermal protection, and integrating systems for orbital operations, Starship V3 aims to transition from test vehicle to operational infrastructure.

Here is an explicit, broken-down list of the key changes, first starting with the changes to Super Heavy V3:

  • Grid Fin Redesign: Reduced from four fins to three. Each fin is now 50% larger and stronger, repositioned for better catching and lifting performance. Fins are lowered on the booster to reduce heat exposure during hot staging, with hardware moved inside the fuel tank for protection.
  • Integrated Hot Staging: Eliminates the old disposable interstage shield. The booster dome is now directly exposed to upper-stage engine ignition, protected by tank pressure and steel shielding. Interstage actuators retract after separation.
  • New Fuel Transfer System: Massive redesign of the fuel transfer tube—roughly the size of a Falcon 9 first stage—enables simultaneous startup of all 33 Raptors for faster, more reliable flip maneuvers.
  • Engine Bay / Thermal Protection: Engine shrouds removed entirely; new shielding added between engines. Propulsion and avionics are more tightly integrated. CO₂ fire suppression system deleted for a simpler, lighter aft section.
  • Propellant Loading Improvements: Switched from one quick disconnect to two separate systems for added redundancy and reduced pad complexity.

Next, we have the changes to Starship V3:

  • Completely Redesigned Propulsion System: Clean-sheet redesign supports new Raptor startup, larger propellant volume, and an improved reaction control system while reducing trapped or leaked propellant risk.
  • Aft Section Simplification: Fluid and electrical systems rerouted; engine shrouds and large aft cavity deleted.
  • Flap Actuation Upgrade: Changed from two actuators per flap to one actuator with three motors for better redundancy, mass efficiency, and lower cost.
  • Faster Starlink Deployment: Upgraded PEZ dispenser enables quicker satellite release.
  • Long-Duration Spaceflight Capability: New systems for long orbital coasts, orbital refueling, cryogenic fluid management, vacuum-insulated header tanks, and high-voltage cryogenic recirculation.
  • Ship-to-Ship Docking + Refueling: Four docking drogues and dedicated propellant transfer connections added to support in-space refueling architecture.
  • Avionics Upgrades: 60 custom avionics units with integrated batteries, inverters, and high-voltage systems (9 MW peak power). New multi-sensor navigation for precision autonomous flight. RF sensors measure propellant in microgravity. ~50 onboard camera views and 480 Mbps Starlink connectivity for low-latency communications.

Next are the changes to the Raptor 3 Engine:

  • Higher Thrust: Sea-level Raptors increased from 230 tf (507k lbf) to 250 tf (551k lbf); vacuum Raptors from 258 tf (568k lbf) to 275 tf (606k lbf).
  • Lower Mass: Sea-level engine mass reduced from 1630 kg to 1525 kg.
  • Simpler Design: Sensors and controllers integrated into the engine body; shrouds eliminated; new ignition system for all variants. Results in ~1 ton of vehicle-level weight savings per engine.

Finally, the upgrades to Launch Pad 2 are as follows:

  • Faster propellant loading via larger farm and more pumps.
  • Chopstick improvements: shorter arms, electromechanical actuators (replacing hydraulic) for reliability.
  • Stronger quick-disconnect arm that swings farther away.
  • Redesigned launch mount for better load handling and protection.
  • New bidirectional flame diverter eliminates post-launch ablation and refurbishment.
  • Hardened propellant systems with separated methane/oxygen lines and protected valves/filters.

SpaceX states these elements “are designed to enable a step-change in Starship capabilities and aim to unlock the vehicle’s core functions, including full and rapid reuse, in-space propellant transfer, deployment of Starlink satellites and orbital data centers, and the ability to send people and cargo to the Moon and Mars.”

With these upgrades, Starship V3 is poised for an epic test flight that could accelerate humanity’s multiplanetary future. The rapid pace of iteration underscores SpaceX’s relentless drive toward making life multiplanetary. Launch watchers are in for a spectacular show.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

Tesla and SpaceX get latest synopsis from Wall Street legend Ron Baron

In a wide-ranging appearance on CNBC’s Squawk Box on May 12, legendary investor Ron Baron, founder, CEO, and portfolio manager of Baron Capital, reaffirmed his deep conviction in Elon Musk’s two flagship companies.

Published

on

Ron Baron on Tesla stock
Credit: CNBC

Legendary investor Ron Baron says he will continue buying stock of both Tesla and SpaceX, as he continues his support behind CEO Elon Musk, who he says is a special person and “brilliant.”

In a wide-ranging appearance on CNBC’s Squawk Box on May 12, legendary investor Ron Baron, founder, CEO, and portfolio manager of Baron Capital, reaffirmed his deep conviction in Elon Musk’s two flagship companies.

With assets under management approaching $55–56 billion, Baron detailed his firm’s substantial holdings, outlined plans for the anticipated SpaceX IPO, and painted an exceptionally optimistic picture for both Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA) and SpaceX, framing them as generational opportunities that will reshape industries and deliver extraordinary long-term returns.

Baron Capital’s position in SpaceX has grown dramatically since the firm began investing around 2017. What started as roughly $1.7 billion has ballooned to more than $15 billion, making it the firm’s largest holding.

Advertisement

Tesla ranks second, valued at approximately $5 billion in the portfolio. Together with stakes in xAI and related Musk-led ventures, these investments account for roughly one-third of Baron Capital’s $60 billion in lifetime profits since 1992. Baron emphasized that the growth stems from Musk’s singular ability to execute ambitious visions—from reusable rockets to global satellite internet and beyond.

The centerpiece of the discussion was SpaceX’s expected initial public offering, targeted for mid-2026 following a confidential S-1 filing. Baron announced plans to purchase an additional $1 billion in shares at the IPO.

He described the company’s trajectory in sweeping terms: “This is going to become the largest company on the planet.”

He highlighted Starlink’s expansion of high-speed internet to every corner of the globe, the revolutionary economics of reusable rockets, and Starship’s potential to enable massive space-based data centers and interplanetary infrastructure.

Baron sees SpaceX not merely as a rocket company but as a platform poised for exponential scaling once it goes public, with post-IPO appreciation potentially reaching 10- to 20- or even 30-times current levels over the next decade or more.

Advertisement

On Tesla, Baron struck an equally enthusiastic note, declaring that “now is Tesla’s moment.” He projected the stock could reach $2,000 to $2,500 per share within 10 years—implying a market capitalization near $8.3 trillion and roughly 5–6 times upside from recent levels. While Tesla remains a major holding, Baron’s optimism centers on its evolution beyond electric vehicles into an AI, robotics, autonomous-driving, and energy platform.

He pointed to robotaxis, Full Self-Driving (FSD) technology, Optimus humanoid robots, energy storage, and the vast real-world data advantage from Tesla’s global fleet as catalysts that will fundamentally alter the company’s revenue model and valuation multiples. Baron views these developments as transformative, shifting Tesla from a traditional automaker to a high-margin technology and infrastructure powerhouse.

Throughout the interview, Baron’s admiration for Musk was unmistakable. He has likened the entrepreneur to a modern Leonardo da Vinci for his artistic, multidisciplinary approach to solving humanity’s biggest challenges.

Baron’s personal commitment mirrors this confidence: he has repeatedly stated he does not expect to sell a single share of his own Tesla or SpaceX holdings in his lifetime, positioning himself as the “last one out” after his clients. This stance underscores a philosophy of patient, long-term ownership rather than short-term trading.

Advertisement

Baron’s comments arrive at a time of heightened anticipation around SpaceX’s public debut, which could rank among the largest IPOs in history and potentially value the company at $1.5–2 trillion or more at listing.

For investors, his message is clear: the Musk ecosystem—spanning electric vehicles, autonomy, robotics, satellite communications, and space exploration—represents one of the most compelling secular growth stories of the era. While short-term volatility in tech and EV stocks may persist, Baron sees these as buying opportunities for those who share his multi-decade horizon.

In summarizing his outlook, Baron reinforced that the combination of technological breakthroughs, massive addressable markets, and Musk’s leadership creates asymmetric upside that few other investments can match.

For Baron Capital’s clients and long-term Tesla and SpaceX shareholders alike, the investor’s latest CNBC remarks serve as both validation and a call to remain patient through the inevitable ups and downs. As Baron sees it, the best days for both companies—and the returns they can deliver—are still ahead.

Advertisement
Continue Reading