News
NASA & US Air Force consider SpaceX’s reusable rockets for future missions
Three of SpaceX’s largest and most important customers have in some way expressed significant interest in flying missions aboard recovered SpaceX Falcon 9 rockets. Even with respect to the three commercial reuses SpaceX has already accomplished this year, the combined interest of NASA, the US Air Force, and Iridium could well mark a major phase change in the space industry.
NASA
According to NASASpaceflight.com, NASA has been exploring reused Falcon 9 hardware for CRS-13, a cargo Dragon mission scheduled for no earlier than December 4th. If NASA finalizes approvals in time, CRS-13 could see SpaceX reuse both the Falcon 9 first stage and the Dragon spacecraft atop it, in many ways reminiscent of SpaceX’s ultimate goal of full reusability. Furthermore, for CRS-13, NASA is focused on launching aboard the same Falcon 9 that flew CRS-11 just four months ago, a pleasant synergy that would figuratively suggest the development of a fleet ownership-type attitude. NASA is by far SpaceX’s largest customer and has been an invaluable source of support and expertise for the company for nearly all of its 15 years of operations.
Falcon 9 1031 prepped and ready for its second flight and SpaceX’s third commercial reuse. (Tom Cross/Teslarati)
US Air Force
The week initially began with a Bloomberg interview of US Space Command head General Jay Ramond that can be best described as a resounding affirmation of the Air Force’s interest in reused SpaceX rockets. Never one for subtlety, Gen. Raymond was quoted saying that the USAF would be “absolutely foolish” and “dumb” to not consider flying on reused rockets. While reused hardware will need to be certified separately for Air Force missions, the Raymond suggested that the process of certifying the reusable Falcon 9 had already begun, although he was unable to provide a an estimate for when it might be completed. Ultimately, although the Air Force is laser-focused on reliability over all other traits, Raymond praised SpaceX for its role in introducing price-shrinking competition to the launch market and reiterated his “[complete] commitment to…reused rocket[s].”
Iridium Communications
Up next on the docket is Iridium, a satellite communications provider that contracted with SpaceX for the eight missions required to launch its next generation Iridium NEXT constellation. While CEO Matt Desch has openly expressed interest in reuse over the last year and a half, he remained skeptical and maintained that he was effectively waiting for a more amicable discount on reused vehicles before biting the bullet. SpaceX must have made an offer that couldn’t be refused, as Iridium Communications announced in a press release that the NEXT-4 and NEXT-5 missions will both fly atop reused Falcon 9 first stages, beginning with NEXT-4 on December 22nd.
Of crucial importance, Iridium also noted that the premiums paid to their launch insurers would not increase as a result of the adoption of reused hardware. While the change boosters means that the newly-completed Landing Zone at Vandenberg will have to wait until 2018 to host a Falcon 9 recovery, that is a small consolation to pay for yet another major customer warming up to SpaceX’s reusability program.
Falcon 9 1041 the night before its predawn liftoff for the Iridium NEXT-3 mission. (SpaceX)
Encore: Spacecom
Finally, in an unexpected and encouraging turn of events, Israeli communications satellite operator Spacecom announced on Wednesday that they had contracted with SpaceX for the 2019 and 2020 launches of the Amos-17 and Amos-8 communications satellites.
In early-September 2016, a Falcon 9 preparing to conduct a static fire suffered a catastrophic failure that destroyed vehicle, Spacecom’s Amos-6 payload, and extensively damaged Launch Complex 40. With SpaceX effectively at fault for the loss, they were contractually obligated to either return Spacecom’s $50m deposit or provide a second launch at no additional cost. Spacecom sided with the latter and further tripled down on SpaceX with a second launch order in 2020 and the decision to fly Amos-17 on a reused Falcon 9.
While one could dismiss the choice to exploit free reflight as a move begrudgingly forced by financial pragmatism, Spacecom’s Amos-8 launch order and decision to fly on reused hardware is undeniable evidence that the two companies have preserved their relationship in spite of the Amos-6 trials and tribulations.
Whoa. Spacecom not only going back to #SpaceX F9 for free re-flight of AMOS-6, but it looks like it will be on a flight-proven F9 to boot!
— Chris G (@ChrisG_SpX) October 18, 2017
All said and done, the fact that all four of these groundbreaking announcements occurred over the course of a handful of days is incredible. If the trope could ever be said to be applicable, it is hard to deny that SpaceX is likely on aerospace’s Cloud 9 this week.
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
