News
SpaceX CEO Elon Musk to present first Starship update since 2019 [webcast]
Barring surprises, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk remains on track to present the first major update on Starship’s development since September 2019 – almost two and a half years ago.
While it’s no longer clear that SpaceX will be able to stack Starship on top of Super Heavy in time for the fully-stacked rocket to serve as an imposing backdrop for the media event, Musk seemingly remains on track to update the world on the status of Starship development as early as 8pm CT (6pm PT, 9pm ET) on Thursday, February 10th (02:00 UTC 11 Feb). Assuming the event is similar to the SpaceX CEO’s first four major Starship presentations, it will be broadcast live to the world on the company’s YouTube channel.
Musk first revealed SpaceX’s detailed plans for a massive, fully-reusable Mars rocket in September 2016. At that point, the rocket – known as the Interplanetary Transport System (ITS) – was to be 12 meters (39 ft) in diameter, 122 meters (400 ft) tall, and made almost entirely out of carbon-fiber composites. In theory, it would have been able to launch up to 300 tons (660,000 lb) to low Earth orbit (LEO) – twice the payload of Saturn V, the next most capable rocket.
In 2017, SpaceX slightly pared back its ambition with a vehicle known as BFR, measuring 9m wide and 106m tall with about a third fewer Raptor engines and estimated performance of ~130 tons (285,000 lb) to LEO. In 2018, on top of announcing Japanese billionaire Yusaku Maezawa’s circumlunar DearMoon mission and BFR’s first real launch contract, SpaceX updated BFR’s design, stretching the booster 12 meters for a total height of 118m (390 ft) and hedging its performance figures with an estimate of 100 tons to LEO in a fully-reusable configuration.
Around the same time as Musk’s 2018 BFR presentation, though, the SpaceX CEO made the decision to entirely scrap the rocket’s composites-heavy design, renaming the rocket ‘Starship’ and replacing the material with stainless steel – effectively reverting structures development to the drawing board. The principles of the rocket, its general shape and layout, and the Raptor engine powering it remained the same. Thanks to steel’s extreme affordability relative to cutting-edge composites, SpaceX was able to make rapid progress and ultimately flew Starhopper – a steel water-tower-esque rocket powered by Raptor – less than a year later in July and August 2019.
Less than a year after Starhopper’s 150m (~500 ft) hop, SpaceX successfully hopped a far more mature Starship prototype known as SN5, which relied on far thinner steel and effectively amounted to a full prototype of the tank section of an orbital-class ship. Just a month later, in September 2020, SpaceX repeated the feat with an entirely different Starship prototype, demonstrating repeatability both in production and flight. Three months later, Starship SN8 – featuring flaps, a nosecone, header tanks, and two more Raptor engines – nearly aced its launch debut. In May 2021, after three more failed test flights, Starship SN15 stuck the landing and survived a 10 km launch, more or less fully demonstrating the rocket’s exotic skydiver-style descent and last-second flip for a vertical landing.
Visible progress has slowed and flight testing has halted since SpaceX began pushing for the first orbital Starship test flight in mid-2021. The company decided against reusing Starship SN15 and also chose not to attempt to replicate the ship’s successful landing with Starship SN16, which was ready for testing a matter of days after. Instead, SpaceX has focused on constructing the orbital launch site and slowly finished Starship S20 and Super Heavy B4 – a pair once expected to support the first orbital test flight. While slow compared to all previous Starship prototypes, Ship 20 has nonetheless made excellent progress and is effectively fully ready for a serious flight test. Booster 4, on the other hand, has barely completed cryogenic proof testing and has yet to perform even a partial wet dress rehearsal (with live propellant) or attempt a single static fire test in last five months.
In short, the status of Starship development – and, especially, Booster 4, Ship 20, and the first orbital test flight – has gotten quite a bit murkier over the last several months. February 9th and 10th marked a welcome change of pace, with SpaceX sailing through the very first attempt at stacking Starship hardware with Starbase’s ‘orbital integration tower’ (launch tower) and a trio of giant, robotic arms. Just a handful of hours after the first ‘arm lift’ began, Starship S20 was safely stacked atop Super Heavy Booster 4, assembling the largest rocket in the world for the second time this year.
With any luck, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk’s first presentation in two and a half years – scheduled no earlier than 8pm CST (02:00 UTC) – will shed further light on the company’s progress towards orbital test flights.
Investor's Corner
New drone video shows Tesla’s Optimus Factory reaching a turning point
New drone footage shows Tesla’s dedicated Optimus factory steel frame nearing completion at Giga Texas.
Tesla’s dedicated Optimus factory at Gigafactory Texas is closing in on a finished steel frame, according to drone footage posted Thursday afternoon by longtime site observer Joe Tegtmeyer. In the video, Tegtmeyer said structural steel assembly is now about five column grids away from reaching the building’s north perimeter beam, putting the primary skeleton in its final stretch roughly six months after Tesla broke ground on the North Campus site in late March.
The Giga Texas Optimus Factory latest update … construction keeps moving fast!
Steel assembly is now only about 5 column grids from the north perimeter beam. Concrete is going in on the three upper floors, rebar is still being laid for more pours, and footing / grade-beam work… pic.twitter.com/qvFPvwnYzW
— Joe Tegtmeyer 🚀 🤠🛸😎 (@JoeTegtmeyer) September 17, 2026
Tegtmeyer’s footage shows concrete already going in on three upper floors while crews continue laying rebar and pouring grade beam footings at ground level. That kind of parallel work, steel rising at one end of the site while concrete sets at the other, is a scheduling approach Tesla used at the original Giga Texas building and appears to be repeating here to save time before the plant’s targeted 2027 production start.
Teslarati has tracked the building’s progress since Tesla confirmed construction was officially underway in May, when the first steel structure went up on what was then bare, reclaimed land. The facility is part of a more than 5.2 million square foot expansion of Giga Texas’s North Campus that Tesla has said will eventually run nearly the length of the existing vehicle factory, over 4,000 feet, while sitting somewhat narrower. Musk has pegged the long term output target at 10 million Optimus units a year once the line is running at full capacity, a volume that would dwarf the one million unit pilot line Tesla is standing up separately at its Fremont, California factory.
Tesla Giga Texas to feature massive Optimus V4 production line
The Texas facility sits alongside another major buildout on the same campus. Terafab, the joint Tesla and SpaceX chip fabrication plant that will eventually supply the silicon running Optimus units in the field. Housing robot assembly and chip production on the same grounds is a deliberate supply chain decision, cutting down on the shipping and lead time that would otherwise sit between the two.
Tesla has not given an updated timeline beyond its previously stated goal of bringing high volume Optimus production online at the site in the summer of 2027. Fremont’s smaller pilot line began mass producing the current Gen 3 robot in January, with that plant expected to build tens of thousands of units this year primarily to generate the real world data Tesla needs to refine the robot’s software before Giga Texas ramps up. Six months of visible construction progress, tracked almost entirely through Tegtmeyer’s recurring drone flights, gives the clearest outside look yet at how seriously Tesla is treating that 2027 deadline.
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.
New drone video shows Tesla’s Optimus Factory reaching a turning point
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
