News
SpaceX's workhorse rocket is almost halfway to reaching ambitious reusability goals
Thanks to a recent cluster of major milestones, SpaceX’s family of Falcon 9 and Heavy rockets are rapidly nearing the halfway point along the path to several ambitious goals for booster and fairing reusability.
Back in the early 2010s, SpaceX’s CEO Elon Musk’s original dream was to make Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy 100% reusable, meaning that the company would need to find ways to reliably recover boosters (first stages), payload fairings (or Dragon spacecraft), and the rocket’s upper (second) stages. The concept of Falcon 9 second stage reuse actually survived all the way into 2018 before Musk ultimately conceded defeat, accepting that Falcon 9 and Heavy simply didn’t offer the performance necessary to make full reusability a worthwhile investment. The concept, however, still lives on in SpaceX’s next-generation Starship launch vehicle.
This does mean Falcon rockets will never be fully reusable, but it’s still up to SpaceX to decide how far they’ll push the envelope with the rockets’ existing reusable hardware. At the moment, it appears that a vast majority of Falcon rockets will be able to be routinely recovered and reused, capitalizing on the fact that Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy boosters already represent some 50-75% of the cost of building each two-stage rocket. While Falcon upper stages and Dragon trunks will never be reused, both booster and payload fairing reuse are rapidly approaching their own unique halfway points on the path to ambitious reusability targets.


Shortly after SpaceX’s January 29th Starlink V1 L3 launch, carrying the third batch of 60 upgraded v1.0 satellites to orbit, twin fairing recovery ships GO Ms. Tree (formerly Mr. Steven) and Ms. Chief teamed up for their second-ever simultaneous fairing catch attempt. Ms. Chief – only active since November 2019 – reportedly just barely missed her first successful catch, while Ms. Tree managed to snag one of the Falcon 9 fairing halves in her massive net – the ship’s third successful catch.
Worth an estimated $3M per half according to CEO Elon Musk, Falcon 9’s payload fairing represents approximately 10% of the rocket’s total manufacturing cost. Made out of a carbon fiber and aluminum honeycomb composite material, fairings also also takes a disproportionate amount of time and space to produce – primarily due to their large size (a school bus could comfortably fit inside a fairing) and the need for commensurately large curing ovens. That composite honeycomb structure also makes it relatively easy for Falcon payload fairings to suffer from corrosion when dunked in seawater, leading SpaceX to the seemingly bizarre solution of installing giant arms and nets on ships.


Catching fairings has proven to be incredibly unforgiving, however, and SpaceX has simultaneously worked to make its Falcon fairings much more waterproof (and thus resistant to corrosion) while keeping them as light as possible. In fact, SpaceX’s first fairing reuse occurred less than three months ago and used two halves that previously landed in the Atlantic Ocean, demonstrating that difficulties reliably catching fairings will not stand in the way of reuse.
Ms. Chief missed her January 29th catch attempt, she still managed to fish her fairing half out of the ocean, while Ms. Tree’s successfully-caught half means that SpaceX ultimately recovered the full Starlink V1 L3 fairing. With a little luck, that recovered fairing will launch again in the near future.
Five for 5
Simultaneously, SpaceX is making excellent progress along the path to airliner-like rocket reusability. In November 2019, on the same Starlink mission that debuted flight-proven fairings, Falcon 9 booster B1048 became the first SpaceX rocket to launch (and land) four times. Less than two months later, Falcon 9 B1049 doubled down on that reusability milestone, becoming the second booster to launch and land four times, followed by Falcon 9 B1046 just 12 days later. Falcon 9 B1046 was (intentionally) destroyed after its fourth launch, precluding a fourth landing attempt, but it emphasizes just how confident SpaceX is in Falcon 9’s Block 5 upgrade.

Designed to allow each Falcon 9 and Heavy booster to perform a minimum of 10 launches and landings, the Block 5 upgrade is potentially just a few weeks away from reaching the halfway point along the path to that ambitious reusability design goal. Speaking at the NASA Kennedy Space Center earlier this month, a SpaceX engineer recently revealed that a Falcon 9 booster would conduct its fifth launch in support of a Starlink mission (either Starlink V1 L4 or L5) scheduled no earlier than (NET) mid-to-late February.
Pictured above, Falcon 9 booster B1048 – the first to launch four times – is the likeliest candidate for the first fifth flight of a SpaceX rocket. If the booster’s reuse goes as planned, it’s safe to say that Falcon 9 B1049.4 will follow closely on the heels of its predecessor with its own fifth-flight milestone. All things considered, SpaceX’s workhorse rocket is rapidly approaching the zenith of its theoretically-achievable reusability.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
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.