News
NASA is training SpaceX's first Crew Dragon astronauts for a much longer mission in space
NASA has revealed that the astronauts assigned to SpaceX’s Crew Dragon astronaut launch debut are training for a space station mission many times longer than initially planned.
Scheduled to deliver two NASA astronauts to and from the International Space Station (ISS) no earlier than (NET) late-April or May 2020, Crew Dragon’s Demo-2 mission will be the first crewed launch in SpaceX’s 18-year history. As previously noted on Teslarati (and by NASA itself, briefly), Demo-2 will also mark the first time in history that a privately-built spacecraft attempts to launch humans into orbit.
Still, NASA has funded the development of Crew Dragon (and competitor Boeing’s Starliner) not to achieve firsts but to restore the United States’ ability to launch its own astronauts to the ISS. Along those lines, both Crew Dragon (Demo-2) and Starliner’s (CFT) astronaut test flights were nominally designed to last about a week or two before returning NASA’s astronauts to Earth – a full end-to-end test for both extraordinarily complex vehicles. Two weeks, however, is simply not long enough for those astronauts to practically serve as full members of space station crew, something the ISS generally requires. In response, NASA has been seriously considering extending Boeing’s crewed test flight and has just recently suggested that SpaceX’s own Demo-2 test flight will be similarly upgraded.
About a month ago, SpaceX and NASA talked openly about the possibility of a longer-duration Crew Dragon astronaut launch debut for the first time, potentially extending the amount of time those astronauts are able to spend at the space station from about one week up to 1.5-3 months. This would allow Crew Dragon’s Demo-2 NASA astronauts – Bob Behnken and Doug Hurley – to serve as full members of the ISS crew, expanding the US presence from one to three astronauts.
Ars Technica’s Eric Berger offered some additional details about what exactly NASA might task Behnken and Hurley with on an extended flight earlier this month. Most importantly, the space agency wants the former astronaut – a Space Shuttle and extra-vehicular activity (EVA) veteran – to be (re)trained for spacewalks, allowing him to support an ever-growing to-do list of critical space station repairs and upgrades.
In effect, extending Crew Dragon’s astronaut flight test will make it almost identical to an “operational” flight where Crew Dragon ferries astronauts to the space station, docks for about six months, and finally returns the same astronauts to Earth at the end of its mission. More importantly, though, NASA’s decision to extend Commercial Crew Program (CCP) test flights – kickstarted with Boeing’s beleaguered Starliner spacecraft – is motivated by a desire to prevent the United States’ presence on the space station from dwindling or even regressing to zero in the near future.
Triggered by years of SpaceX and Boeing delays, NASA will now likely have to purchase more seats on Russian Soyuz launches if it wishes to maintain an full, uninterrupted presence on ISS for the next 12-24 months. After suffering numerous deeply concerning software failures on its first and only orbital launch, Boeing’s Starliner is unlikely to be ready to launch crew anytime soon. At the same time, although SpaceX is closer to its astronaut launch debut than ever before, it’s highly unlikely that Crew Dragon can singlehandedly support a full ISS complement of three NASA astronauts while Starliner works out its issues.
As such, NASA is looking everywhere it can to squeeze a bit more on-orbit time out of existing astronaut missions scheduled in the next year or so, and both Starliner and Crew Dragon’s test flights – barring showstoppers – are excellent opportunities. With NASA Johnson Space Center’s confirmation that both Behnken and Hurley are already deep into the extra training needed for an extended flight, chances are good that both astronauts will be ready for a one- or several-month mission by the time that NASA and SpaceX are ready and willing to launch.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
Investor's Corner
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
Tesla and SpaceX sue a small Illinois firm after cease and desist letters over Terafab.
Tesla and SpaceX are asking a federal judge to rule that their planned Terafab chip factory does not infringe a small Illinois company’s trademark, a request that arrives only after months of quiet negotiation broke down this summer.
The dispute traces to May 18, when Tesla filed three U.S. trademark applications for “Terafab” and “Tesla Terafab,” covering semiconductor chips and related chip making services. TERA-print LLC, a nanotechnology company that has held a federal trademark for “Tera-Fab” since 2021, responded five days later with a cease and desist letter. According to the lawsuit, first reported by Reuters, TERA-print argued that Tesla and SpaceX’s use of “Terafab” would confuse consumers familiar with its own trademark, which covers a desktop photolithography printer sold to researchers for sensor and bioengineering work.
What stands out in the filing is the timing of TERA-print’s own paperwork. One day before sending that cease and desist letter, on May 22, TERA-print applied to expand its existing registration to cover semiconductor materials, silicon chips, nanoelectronic devices and AI design services, categories it had not previously claimed. Tesla and SpaceX call that filing opportunistic in their complaint, noting it arrived two months after Tesla’s public Terafab announcement and just days after Tesla’s own trademark applications went in.
Elon Musk launches TERAFAB: The $25B Tesla-SpaceXAI chip factory that will rewire the AI industry
By June 10, TERA-print was threatening to sue for federal trademark infringement, false designation of origin and unfair competition, the complaint states. Rather than wait to be sued, Tesla, SpaceX and SpaceXAI met with TERA-print six separate times between June and August trying to resolve the dispute directly. Those talks collapsed, and the companies filed for declaratory judgment this week in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, asking a judge to find that “Terafab” does not infringe TERA-print’s mark before TERA-print can file a claim of its own.
TERA-print isn’t backing down. The company told PCMag it discussed a settlement with Tesla as recently as September 2 and feels misled by what it called Tesla’s professed interest in settling. Its CTO, Andrey Ivankin, said TERA-print holds a Defense Department contract to fabricate semiconductors and partially owns Mattiq Inc., an AI company built on TERA-print’s products, and that the company will vigorously defend its rights.
Tesla and SpaceX argue the overlap is superficial. Terafab is planned as a $16.8 billion complex spanning roughly 100 million square feet at the Grimes County site SpaceX confirmed last month, built to produce chips for Optimus robots, Tesla’s AI computing needs and SpaceX’s orbital data center ambitions, a scale and purpose the companies say no reasonable consumer would confuse with a tabletop lab printer. TERA-print’s product line has stayed focused on lithography tools for biological and sensor research since it registered its mark in 2021.
The trademark fight is the second legal dispute tied to the Terafab project in the past week, following a separate SpaceX suit aimed at keeping company records about the facility out of public view, as KBTX reported. Whether construction proceeds under the Terafab name now depends on a federal judge in Austin.
News
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
NHTSA escalated its Cybercab audit into a sworn Special Order with a September 30 deadline.
Federal regulators have moved from asking Tesla questions about its Cybercab to demanding sworn answers. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued a Special Order that requires a Tesla officer to sign an affidavit attesting to the completeness of the company’s responses, with a deadline of September 30.
The order builds on Audit Query AQ26002, which NHTSA opened on September 3, the same day Tesla began commercial Cybercab service in Austin. Teslarati covered that initial inquiry when it surfaced, noting the agency wanted to understand how Tesla certified a vehicle with no permanently attached steering wheel, pedals, or mirrors as compliant with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. A Special Order is a different tool and converts a fact finding review into a legally enforceable demand, the same mechanism NHTSA used against Tesla in 2023 during its Autopilot investigation.
Several of the 21 requests target a specific gap in Cybercab’s design. One asks whether Tesla used temporarily attached human controls at any point to help certify the vehicle, and if so, which standards depended on that equipment being present. Another quotes an existing rule directly: “The service brakes shall be activated by means of a foot control.” Cybercab has no foot pedal. NHTSA wants a detailed explanation of how the vehicle satisfies that requirement, and how it complies without the kind of exemption granted to Zoox in July under Part 555, the regulatory pathway built for steering wheel free vehicles.
The order does not claim Cybercab is unsafe or that Tesla broke a rule. It requires Tesla to explain, under oath, the reasoning behind decisions the company already made when it self-certified the vehicle. That distinction matters, but so does the exposure. Motor1’s reporting, summarized here, put potential civil penalty exposure as high as $139 million if NHTSA later finds the certification was flawed, on top of whatever criminal risk comes with a false sworn statement.
Tesla has not said publicly how it plans to respond. Cybercab is still carrying passengers in Austin through the Robotaxi app while the September 30 deadline approaches, and the company has continued expanding the vehicle’s footprint even as the regulatory question remains open. The Special Order does not pause any of that and just sets a date by which Tesla has to put its certification logic on the record, with a company officer’s name attached to it.
In a new interview on Wednesday, Tesla uber bull Ron Baron said that anyone looking to buy the company’s stock should do so as soon as they can.
Baron, founder and CEO of Baron Capital and one of Tesla’s most persistent institutional bulls, used a CNBC Squawk Box appearance on Wednesday to deliver a familiar message with fresh urgency: In his opinion, Tesla stock is a buy:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.”
The Baron Capital frontman’s case is built around Full Self-Driving. Tesla reported 1.48 million active FSD subscriptions in the second quarter, up 56 percent year over year, and company officials have said roughly 55 percent of new North American deliveries left with a subscription enabled.
Baron framed that attach rate as proof the product is moving from enthusiast extra to default expectation, and as a reason software, not just vehicle volume, should drive the next phase of value.
His conviction on Tesla shares is not theoretical, as Baron Capital made its first Tesla investment in 2014, after years of meetings that began around the 2010 IPO roadshow. The firm later built a large SpaceX position starting in 2017.
Ron Baron today in new interview on Tesla:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.” pic.twitter.com/Rv5PB0bVZ2
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) September 16, 2026
Baron said those Musk-led bets have generated about $30 billion of the $71 billion in profits Baron Capital has produced for clients. He put the firm’s current exposure at roughly $25 billion in SpaceX and $5 billion in Tesla. Personally, he described SpaceX as his largest holding, at about $5 billion, with about $1.5 billion in Tesla and additional Tesla exposure through the firm’s funds.
That concentration is also a statement of loyalty. Asked about talk of a SpaceX-Tesla combination, Baron said he had already walked Elon Musk through arguments for and against a deal, then declined to repeat them on air. His public position was simpler: “Whatever you decide is better is what I’m going to support,” he said to Musk.
Baron also said that he picked up the farewell edition of the Model S after Tesla decided to sunset the vehicle earlier this year, calling it his favorite car he’s ever driven.
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
