News
SpaceX Crew Dragon, four astronauts set for brief flight around the space station
To set the stage for another Dragon launch just a few weeks from now, NASA astronauts are preparing to board a SpaceX Crew Dragon for a brief flight around the International Space Station (ISS).
Orbiting roughly 400 km (250 mi) above the Earth’s surface, the ISS and its crew of seven international astronauts have just two docking ports available to manage a growing influx of SpaceX Crew and Cargo Dragon 2 spacecraft, as well as Boeing’s chronically delayed Starliner. While Starliner hasn’t flown since a near-catastrophic orbital debut in December 2019 and isn’t likely to reattempt that uncrewed flight test until the second half of 2021, SpaceX is in the exact opposite position as it prepares to sustain an unprecedented Dragon launch cadence.
One challenge of that cadence ramp – space station port logistics and availability – is now becoming clear as SpaceX nears its next Crew Dragon NASA astronaut launch.
All launched on SpaceX Cargo Dragons, including a third destroyed during Falcon 9’s CRS-7 launch failure, the International Space Station has just two perpendicular International Docking Adapter (IDA) ports – one facing space and the other facing Earth. Regardless of CRS-7’s lost port, that IDA duo was always NASA’s plan.
The ISS requires the use of a huge, robotic arm (Canadarm2) to unload unpressurized cargo from spacecraft and that arm doesn’t have the mobility to access vehicles docked to the Earth-facing IDA port, meaning that cargo spacecraft with IDA ports can really only dock on the space-facing port. Cargo Dragon 2’s use of IDA docking and the Cygnus spacecraft’s use of berthing thankfully mean that neither NASA Commercial Resupply Services 2 (CRS2) vehicle is at risk of a traffic jam.
Sierra Nevada Corporation (SNC) is set to debut the cargo variant of its Dream Chaser spaceplane as early as 2022 for annual launches and will need to share that same lone IDA port with Cargo Dragon for its (approximately) annual resupply missions. More importantly, though, Crew Dragon and Boeing’s Starliner both require the use of one of those two IDA ports to deliver astronauts to and from the ISS. Both spacecraft are also expected to leave with the same crew that launched on them, meaning that both will spend a fully six or so months in orbit on each crew rotation mission.
In general, NASA also plans to overlap all Commercial Crew Program (CCP) astronaut launches, meaning that Crew Dragon will wait for Starliner to arrive (and vice versa) before departing the ISS with its four-astronaut crew. Those use-cases and safety requirements combine to create strict, complex scheduling challenges that mean a Cargo Dragon or Dream Chaser can never be docked to the ISS during a crew handover, while also adding significant constraints to any planned private astronaut (tourist) missions to the station – of which SpaceX already has at least one.
In the meantime, though Boeing’s Starliner is now at least 18 months behind SpaceX’s Crew Dragon on the path to launching NASA astronauts to and from the ISS, SpaceX is picking up the slack to the extent that station ‘traffic’ conditions are practically unaffected. Whereas NASA’s nominal plan was to alternate between its two redundant Commercial Crew providers before Boeing ran into huge delays, SpaceX is on track to launch Crew Dragon’s Crew-2 astronaut ferry mission as early as April 22nd.
The flight-proven Demo-2 Dragon will then rendezvous with the ISS while Crew-1’s Dragon and four astronauts are still aboard the station. Crew-1 and Crew-2 will spend about a week together before the former group boards their Dragon and heads for home. As few as six or so weeks later, SpaceX could launch its second Cargo Dragon 2 resupply mission, known as CRS-22. – This morning’s “port relocation,” which will see the Crew-1 Dragon will ‘relocate’ from the station’s Earth-facing IDA to its space-facing port, is thus necessary to free up that port for Cargo Dragon’s arrival when Crew-1 departs.
Barring major delays, SpaceX is currently on track to complete another two Crew and Cargo Dragon launches in 2-3 months, marking four Dragon missions in seven months if all goes to plan. Another three Dragon missions are firmly scheduled in 2021, potentially making for seven Dragon launches in 11-12 months if schedules hold. SpaceX’s current record – technically achieved twice in 2018 and 2019 – is five orbital Dragon missions in 12 months.
Tune in below around 6am EDT (UTC-4) to catch Crew Dragon C207’s brief 46-minute jaunt around the International Space Station (ISS) – a first for an American crewed spacecraft of any kind.
Tesla shared a striking video showcasing the decommissioning of the original Model S and Model X assembly line at its Fremont Factory in Northern California. Completed in just 46 days, the teardown involved heavy machinery dismantling concrete pits, removing robotic arms and conveyors, and clearing the space for new production.
The post, captioned “End of an era,” captured both the end of a historic chapter and Tesla’s aggressive pivot toward its next major initiative, Optimus.
End of an era: Decommissioning the original Model S & X assembly line in just 46 days pic.twitter.com/kGEdfhl62h
— Tesla Manufacturing (@gigafactories) July 10, 2026
The decision to retire the Model S and Model X originated during Tesla’s Q4 2025 Earnings Call in late January 2026. CEO Elon Musk announced that production of the company’s flagship sedan and SUV would wind down by the end of Q2 2026, describing it as bringing the programs to an “honorable discharge.”
Custom orders ceased around early April 2026, with the final vehicles rolling off the line in early May. A special signature delivery ceremony on May 20 marked the emotional close for these vehicles, which had defined Tesla’s early success and luxury EV segment since the Model S launch in 2012.
The primary reason for tearing down the lines was to repurpose the valuable factory floor space for high-volume production of Tesla’s Optimus humanoid robot. Musk had indicated on Earnings Calls that the Fremont S/X line would be replaced by a dedicated Optimus manufacturing line targeting a capacity of one million units per year.
This move aligns with Tesla’s broader strategic shift from traditional vehicle manufacturing toward robotics and artificial intelligence, leveraging the company’s expertise in autonomy, AI training, and high-volume production.
Optimus, Tesla’s general-purpose humanoid robot, is designed to perform repetitive or dangerous tasks in factories, warehouses, and eventually homes. Powered by Tesla’s AI and Neural Networks, it aims to be a versatile, affordable platform. Production of Optimus Gen 3 is already underway in limited form at Fremont, with full-scale output on the converted line expected to begin in late July or August.
Tesla is targeting rapid scaling, with internal ambitions pointing toward tens or even hundreds of thousands of units annually by the end of 2026.
Longer-term, Tesla is constructing a much larger second-generation Optimus facility at Giga Texas, with potential capacity reaching millions of units per year. The company views Optimus as a transformative product that could eventually surpass its automotive business in scale and value, enabling widespread deployment of useful robots across industries. CEO Elon Musk has even predicted it would be the most popular product of all-time.
As one era closes at Fremont, another is rapidly taking shape.
Elon Musk posted a candid admission on his social media platform X on June 9, declaring that he had been “clearly wrong” about Anthropic. The statement marked a notable reversal from his earlier skepticism toward the AI company.
In September, Musk had written, “Winning was never in the set of possible outcomes for Anthropic,” reflecting his view at the time that the startup had lacked the foundation or even the trajectory to succeed in what is an incredibly intense race for advanced artificial intelligence.
Musk’s latest post came amid discussion of Anthropic’s reliance on external compute resources. He praised the company’s progress, stating that Anthropic is “obviously currently the leader in AI” and that “no company has released a model as good as Mythos/Fable,” with expectations of a strong follow-up in Mythos 2.
The tone shifted dramatically from dismissal to acknowledgement of superior performance.
I was clearly wrong about Anthropic. They are obviously currently the leader in AI. No company has released a model as good as Mythos/Fable and they will undoubtedly have Mythos 2 ready soon.
And I would never cut them off in a way that hurt them badly, even as a competitor.…
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 9, 2026
The context of Musk’s comments added significance. Anthropic has been operating under a recent compute deal with SpaceXAI, Musk’s AI infrastructure-focused venture. The pair entered a short-term GPU lease agreement initiated in May, providing Anthropic access to critical computing power for training and deploying its frontier models.
SpaceXAI signs agreement with Anthropic for massive AI supercomputer access
Some observers had speculated that Musk could leverage this dependency to disadvantage a rival. Musk directly addressed the possibility, writing, “I would never cut them off in a way that hurt them badly, even as a competitor. That’s not my style.”
To support his commitment to ethical competition, Musk referenced concrete examples from his other companies. Tesla famously open-sourced its entire portfolio of electric vehicle patents in 2014. The move was designed to accelerate the global adoption of sustainable transportation technology rather than protect proprietary advantages.
Tesla also made its Supercharger network available to competing electric vehicle manufacturers, transforming what could have remained an exclusive charging ecosystem into a shared infrastructure that benefits the broader industry and reduces barriers for EV adoption.
Musk further pointed to SpaceX’s practices, noting that the company launches satellites for competing commercial systems “with no increase in price or use of unfair terms.” He extended the principle to his social platform, observing that “even my worst enemies attack me on this platform,” underscoring preference for open discourse over retaliation.
These examples have illustrated Musk’s long-standing philosophy that long-term technological progress is best served by open competition and infrastructure sharing rather than leveraging market power to stifle rivals. In the fast-evolving AI sector, where compute resources and model capabilities determine leadership, Musk’s stance suggests a willingness to compete on innovation and performance alone.
Musk’s admission arrives as SpaceXAI itself advances its own frontier models while maintaining business relationships across the ecosystem. By publicly correcting his earlier assessment and reaffirming principles of fair play, Musk highlights a model of competition that prioritizes advancement of the field over short-term tactical advantages.
A Tesla analyst believes the company’s Full Self-Driving suite is close to an “inflection point,” where people will finally realize that it is more than what it appears, similar to how many view the iPhone.
Pierre Ferragu, an analyst who has covered Tesla for many years at New Street Research, says the Full Self-Driving suite is one piece of evidence supporting the view that a Tesla is more than a car. He compared it to the iPhone and noted that the high price tag seemed like a lot for a phone early on. Then people realized the iPhone was more than just something you make calls with. It made their lives simpler.
🚨 Analyst @p_ferragu says Tesla Full Self-Driving is at an “inflection point” in a recent commentary:
“A Tesla is not a car, the same way an iPhone was not a phone. As a tool that gets you to work peacefully every morning, it is not expensive. Give us 2 more quarters to see… pic.twitter.com/tm6xFrjVPV
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 10, 2026
Suddenly, that price tag was justified.
Tesla offers several models under the average transaction price for a new vehicle, which was above $49,000, according to Kelley Blue Book. However, that does not take into account that many people can still not afford a $35,000 vehicle. Ferragu offers his thoughts:
“Remember when the addressable market of the iPhone was 10 million units? Then people realized how good it was, and now, nearly 250m are sold every year.
A similar evolution for Tesla is still on the table. A Tesla is not a car, the same way an iPhone was not a phone.
A model 3 at $35k + $100 per month is too expensive for most, but only as a car, the same way a $600 iPhone was too expensive for most, until most realized it was much more than a phone.
As a tool that gets you to work peacefully every morning, it is not expensive.”
This point is valid, especially considering the iPhone’s impact on the cell phone market. There are still a handful of players, but most people you know have an iPhone. The iPhone ties into Apple’s other ecosystem of products.
This is how Tesla plans to infiltrate the automotive market, and once the company offers a fully autonomous suite, or something that can allow for unsupervised self-driving, more and more people will flock to Tesla.
Ferragu believes Tesla needs two additional quarters of development before things will truly change. He didn’t elaborate on what will happen in two quarters, but he said it will give us all time to “see where this is heading.”
It is really quite interesting to see people’s reactions when they find out what a Tesla is capable of. Full Self-Driving is a great tool for taking stress out of travel; I use it daily, and it has made it really difficult to consider taking any other car on a drive of practically any length.
To me, it is really hard to believe that people will not at least seriously consider a Tesla as their next car if they experience Full Self-Driving. This is a major point for those who argue that Tesla should advertise in some way.
Tesla shows rapid teardown of Model S and X lines, paving the way for Optimus at Fremont
Elon Musk admits he was ‘clearly wrong’ about Anthropic
