News
SpaceX confirms Starlink launch plans hours before Thursday liftoff
Update: Waiting longer than it ever has before, SpaceX finally confirmed it will attempt to launch Starlink 4-3 less than seven hours before the mission’s planned 6:12 pm EST (23:12 UTC), December 2nd liftoff. SpaceX has yet to publish any additional details or webcast links for the launch but should (in theory) do so within the next few hours.
SpaceX has raised Falcon 9 vertical for a record-breaking Starlink and rideshare mission known as Starlink Group 4 Launch 3 (4-3).
According to Spaceflight Now, Falcon 9 rolled out to SpaceX’s Cape Canaveral LC-40 launch pad and was expected to perform a static fire test as early as Monday, November 29th, briefly firing up the mystery flight-proven booster’s nine Merlin 1D engines to verify the rocket’s health. As of early Wednesday, that static fire has yet to happen, leaving SpaceX just ~36 hours to test the rocket before its current 5:57 pm EST (22:57 UTC), December 2nd launch target.
Despite its name, Starlink 4-3 will be SpaceX’s second Group 4 launch and is scheduled to deliver another 50-52 laser-linked Starlink V1.5 satellites to low Earth orbit. Normally, Starlink 4-3 would be carrying 53 Starlink satellites but SpaceX will instead swap out two or three Starlink satellites for two rideshare payloads from Earth observation company Blacksky.
Starlink 4-3 will be SpaceX’s fifth Starlink rideshare mission and second with Earth imaging satellites from Blacksky after Starlink V1 L9’s successful August 2020 launch. Each weighing around 60 kg (130 lb), Blacksky’s small ‘Gen2’ satellites are designed to capture images of Earth at resolutions of up to 0.9 meters per pixel. If successful, the launch will raise the number of operational Blacksky satellites in orbit from 8 to 10. Another two launches are expected to occur in the next two months for a total of 14 satellites.
Like past Starlink rideshares, SpaceX will likely launch Falcon 9 to a slightly higher orbit than usual – tailored to each customer’s needs. For SXRS-2, Spaceflight says Falcon 9 will deploy all Starlink and rideshare payloads in a (likely circular) 430 km (270 mi) low Earth orbit. In comparison, Falcon 9 deployed Starlink 4-1 in an orbit roughly 340 by 220 km.
For SpaceX, Starlink 4-3 will set at least two major spaceflight records. First, if all goes well, it will be SpaceX’s 27th launch of 2021 – a new record for annual launch cadence. Though CEO Elon Musk originally hoped for 40-48 launches this year, it appears that SpaceX will still manage around 29-31 by the end of December. However, if SpaceX managed to excise the apparent Starlink production gremlins that partly caused its launch cadence to plummet from 20 missions in the first half of 2021 to ~10 in the second half, 2022 could potentially meet Musk’s 2021 expectations.
Additionally, as pointed out by a Teslarati reader, Starlink 4-3 could also see Falcon 9 become the first American rocket in history to successfully complete more than 100 orbital launches in a row, narrowly beating out McDonnell Douglas’ retired Delta II rocket for the title. Earlier this year, many outlets already reported that SpaceX’s May 26th Starlink-28 launch was its 100th consecutive launch. While true in a very literal sense, it ignores SpaceX’s infamous Amos-6 Falcon 9 failure, which occurred well before liftoff but still destroyed both the rocket and payload. Following NASA’s DART mission earlier this month, which was Falcon 9’s unequivocal 100th launch success, Starlink 4-3 will be Falcon 9’s 101st orbital launch since Amos-6.
Only Russia’s R-7 (Soyuz) rockets – the most-launched rocket family in history – have successfully launched more times in a row. Since 1966, Soyuz rockets have launched more than 1900 times and the family has repeatedly completed 100 consecutively successful launches over its decades of operation. Eleven years after its debut, Falcon 9 currently stands at 127 fully successful launches – a lifetime away from matching Soyuz but still well on its way to a thoroughly impressive second place.
Stay tuned for official confirmation from SpaceX of Starlink 4-3’s pending static fire and December 2nd launch date.
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
