News
SpaceX gears up for Crew Dragon’s first recovery with a giant inflatable cushion
Paired with observations and comments from sources familiar with the company, all signs seem to indicate that SpaceX is planning to recover their first Crew Dragon spacecraft with a giant inflatable cushion, to be towed a hundred or so miles off the coast of California by one of the company’s Port of LA-stationed recovery vessels.
Despite a minor mishap during some sort of inaugural sea-trial of a custom Crew Dragon mass simulator, SpaceX technicians are pushing ahead with a test campaign intended properly characterize exactly how to best recover a Dragon while side-stepping around the problems caused by seawater immersion.
Inside the clean room at SpaceX HQ, Crew Dragon is nearing completion. This will be the capsule to make the first crewed flight, currently slated for April 2019.#spacex #CrewDragon @Teslarati pic.twitter.com/tjzuwfGV2O
— Pauline Acalin (@w00ki33) August 16, 2018
Why recover your Dragon?
First off, why would SpaceX choose to develop a new method of Dragon recovery – different than the company’s current experience with simply landing the capsules in the ocean – with the expectation that it will debut during the recovery of Crew Dragon after its very first demonstration mission (DM-1)? A huge number of unknowns and major questions remain, but the decision to attempt to avoid seawater immersion during the DM-1 Dragon recovery is very likely no coincidence.
Over the last several years, SpaceX engineers and technicians have learned a huge amount from recovering, refurbishing, and even reusing Cargo Dragons to resupply the International Space Station for NASA. Of all the lessons learned, the most unequivocal has to be a newfound appreciation for just how difficult it is to safely and reliably reuse spacecraft and rocket components after landing and being immersed in seawater. Despite SpaceX’s growing experience with reusing both Falcon 9 and Cargo Dragon, Dragons still typically require a bare minimum of 6-12 months of refurbishment before they are ready for another launch.
-
- SpaceX’s CRS-13 Cargo Dragon, capsule C108, seen near the end of its refurbishment. (SpaceX)
-
- A reused orbital spacecraft, Cargo Dragon, back on Earth after its second successful resupply mission. (SpaceX)
-
- All Crew and Cargo Dragons are built and refurbished in the same processing facility, a clean-room inside SpaceX’s Hawthorne, CA factory. (SpaceX)
For Crew Dragon’s DM-1 debut, it thus makes sense that SpaceX wants to recover the spacecraft in such a way that it is exceptionally easy to rapidly refurbish. Perhaps just several months after that capsule returns to Earth, currently expected no earlier than December 2018, SpaceX’s first crewed Crew Dragon demonstration’s tentative April 2019 launch debut will depend entirely on the completion and review of an In-Flight Abort (IFA) test planned just one month prior, March 2019.
The planned IFA test of Crew Dragon hinges entirely on DM-1 and Dragon refurbishment because the present plan (and launch schedule) absolutely depends on reflying DM-1’s Crew Dragon capsule, potentially recovered from orbit as few as three months prior.
With a successful 2015 Pad Abort already under Crew Dragon’s belt, SpaceX voluntarily chose to conduct an additional complimentary in-flight abort not explicitly required by NASA, designed to demonstrate that Dragon will be able to safely extract astronauts from a failing rocket at the point of peak aerodynamic pressure (Max-Q). Essentially, a combination of successful aborts both on the launch pad and during Max-Q would theoretically demonstrate beyond any reasonable doubt that Crew Dragon really is capable of safely aborting a launch and protecting its astronauts at any point during launch.
Cargo Dragon has demonstrated that – apparently – no amount of heroics can refurbish the recovered spacecraft in just a small handful of months after seawater immersion, not without major changes to its design. As such, preventing that with some sort of inflatable cushion (or even Mr Steven’s net) would likely save many months of drying, cleaning, and requalification testing of all externally impacted components.
-
- Cargo Dragon returns to Earth looking rather well-done. (SpaceX)
-
- The first spaceworthy Crew Dragon capsule is already in Florida, preparing for its November 2018 launch debut. The same capsule will be refurbished and reflown as few as three months after recovery. (SpaceX)
-
- SpaceX Crew Dragon capsule C203 – then assigned DM-2 – is seen here in August 2018. (Pauline Acalin)
How to recover your Dragon
While the “why” is fairly obvious at this point, the “how” of actually making such a cushioned recovery happen is far less clear. Still, we at least know from several recent comments from SpaceX CEO Elon Musk and statements made in environmental impact analyses that the company has been considering such recoveries for some time.
Despite the fact that Crew Dragon’s original propulsive landing capability was nixed due to the unlikelihood of NASA ever certifying it for crewed landings and the expense required to attempt that certification, there is still clearly some latent interest (and value) in precisely landing Crew Dragon, even if only to speed up capsule and crew recovery after splashdown. A March 2018 preliminary environmental impact analysis of Gulf of Mexico Dragon recoveries – as a backup to bad weather in the Pacific and Atlantic – made the interest in precision exceptionally clear.
“The splashdown zone is a circle with a radius of approximately 5.4 nautical miles. … Dragon has been designed to perform precision landings in order to minimize the size of the splashdown zone and recovery time.”
Admittedly, a circle with a diameter of 10.8 nautical miles (20 km) does not exactly scream “precision” and ~20 km is likely around a thousand times less precise than what’s needed to land on the 30m-diameter inflatable structure present at Berth 240, but it’s probable that the splashdown zone as discussed is a worst-case scenario meant to give SpaceX’s recovery team plenty of wiggle room.
-
- Crew Dragon was originally designed with propulsive landings in mind, much like Falcon 9’s booster recovery. (SpaceX)
-
- In place of propulsive landing, it appears that a giant inflatable cushion is the new solution for quick reuse. (Pauline Acalin)
Musk also took a few seconds of a Falcon Heavy post-launch press conference to briefly describe Mr Steven, and he just so happened to touch on fairing and Dragon recovery:
“And we’ve got a special boat to catch the fairing. … It’s like a giant catcher’s mitt in boat form. I think we might be able to do the same thing with Dragon. So…if NASA wants us to, we can try to catch Dragon. Literally, it’s meant for the fairing, but it would work for Dragon, too.” – Elon Musk
Mr Steven takes one for the team
Even more experimental than fairing recovery, SpaceX happened to experience a minor incident while attempting to test aspects of its prototype Dragon catcher apparatus in early August. Partially captured by Teslarati photographer Pauline Acalin, SpaceX technicians were lifting a Crew Dragon heatshield mass simulator with a healthy topping of buoys onto Mr Steven. Moments after it was lowered onto the deck, the whole setup disappeared below the vessel’s side rails in a massive boom.
-
- The Crew Dragon mass simulator is loaded onto Mr Steven for the first time, August 3rd. (Pauline Acalin)
-
- Shortly after touchdown, the mass sim disappeared with a deafening boom, presumably breaking through Mr Steven’s wooden deck. (Pauline Acalin)
-
- SpaceX technicians lift a Crew Dragon mass simulator off of Mr Steven’s deck after accidentally breaking it. (Pauline Acalin)
According to sources familiar with SpaceX’s recovery fleet, the mishap was much less severe than the deafening noise it produced seemed to indicate from the sidelines. They described the aftermath as “an annoying accident” that was unlikely to take any significant amount of time to repair. More likely than not, Mr Steven’s wooden deck suffered some level of structural degradation after several years of active use, something that SpaceX technicians only discovered after loading (or maybe dropping) a heavy Dragon mass simulator aboard.
Regardless, one could certainly say that the test in question was more or less a success, as it most certainly demonstrated whether Mr Steven’s deck was actually capable of supporting the heavy test article (it was not). A few repairs and structural reinforcements later, the vessel is likely already back in working order, with photos taken on August 19th showing that the focus has returned to the vessel’s arms (two of which must have been removed earlier this week).
For prompt updates, on-the-ground perspectives, and unique glimpses of SpaceX’s rocket recovery fleet check out our brand new LaunchPad and LandingZone newsletters!
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
