News
Rocket Lab to resume launches following in-flight anomaly investigation
Less than a month after the complete loss of customer payload due to an in-flight anomaly, Rocket Lab has announced that it is ready to return its small-class Electron rocket to flight. Company CEO, Peter Beck, during a media briefing Friday (July 31) said that the Electron second-stage “re-entered the atmosphere and burned up” resulting in a failed July 4 launch of the Electron and complete loss the customer payload of seven small satellites. Beck went on to state that through a collaborative investigation with the Federal Aviation Administration Rocket Lab was “able to quickly reconstruct what happened and the AIB board (Accident Investigation Board) was able to confidently narrow down the issue to a single electrical connection.”
The thirteenth flight of the Electron carried seven small satellites, all Earth-imaging inspiring the “Pics Or It Didn’t Happen” mission name. The rocket initially experienced a flawless launch from the company’s Launch Complex-1A on New Zealand’s Mahia Penninsula and everything seemed like it was going to plan until the video feed cut out unexpectedly shortly after the nominal ignition of the second-stage which was intended to carry the payloads to orbit.
The launch was completely event free during the first-stage ascent, stage separation, second stage ignition, and payload fairing jettison, then trouble occurred. Beck stated that the electrical connection that went bad during the second-stage of the flight was “incredibly unusual because it was able to evade all of the pre-flight acceptance testing.” Beck went on to explain that “while all of the testing showed no issues, after a period of time one of the joints had high resistance and that high resistance led to heating. That heating then led to thermal expansion of one of the components. That thermal expansion and heating enabled some of the potting components – that are around that joint to keep it secure from vibration – to flow.”
Once the potting compound used to secure electrical connections was able to heat up and essentially melt – or began to flow – the electrical connection become unsecured and led to the interruption in electrical current throughout the second-stage. Beck stated that “when the video stops (in the webcast) is exactly the point (of failure).” Although the video cut out, Rocket Lab ground stations continued to receive telemetry data of the flight’s progress due to the amount of redundancy with the systems aboard Electron “telemetry is the only way you can reconstruct this stuff so we have a very high priority of those (data) channels” Beck said.
With the immense amount of data that was received during the flight and throughout the second-stage shutdown Rocket Lab was able to quickly determine the cause of the error and perform tests to determine exactly what occurred during the failed flight. “The vehicle as it flies every flight has just a huge amount of instrumentation. That coupled with a graceful shutdown coupled with full telemetry stream throughout the whole anomaly, we were really able to quickly reconstruct what happened” Beck said.
The vast amount of data and the ability to sufficiently replicate the incident now means that Rocket Lab has a plan of action in place to mitigate any failures – of this nature – on future missions. “We can actually mitigate (the anomaly) very easily through a slight change in production processes, but more importantly we can screen for it in our current vehicles and stock through more in-depth testing procedures.”
To that end, the Rocket Lab Electron is set to return to flight in August, an impeccable turn around time following an anomaly investigation.”I’m very proud of the way the team has been able to identify this issue and rectify it so quickly” Beck said. He gave high praise to the entire Rocket Lab team for relentlessly working toward determining, not only the cause of the anomaly but working toward a solution for a quick return to flight. “Literally ten minutes after we saw some anomalous behavior during the flight, the team already started to work it and they haven’t stopped. They’ve been relentless” Beck said.
The customer payload that will fly aboard the return to flight and fourteenth mission of Electron launch is expected to be announced very soon. Rocket Lab did state that following a successful launch from the LC-1A complex in New Zealand, the following mission would be the first to take place from the brand new Launch Complex 2 located at the Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport at NASA Wallops in Virginia. Although an American private company, Rocket Lab predominately launches from New Zealand. The upcoming mission will be the first Electron flight to occur from American soil.
Beck closed the media briefing by stating that Rocket Lab looks forward to returning to operational status and launching Electrons every month, if not bi-weekly. He expressed that Rocket Lab is looking to the future and hopes to achieve a full recovery effort of the first stage booster via a helicopter and a specially designed grappling hook with the seventeenth flight of Electron. He also hinted that “there’ll be a couple of other little surprises as well, as we execute some other programs that have been cooking up in the background.”
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
