News
SpaceX Inspiration4 astronaut shares behind-the-scenes look at largest space window’s ‘first light’
SpaceX Inspiration4 astronaut Sian Proctor has shared the first behind-the-scenes look at what it was like for the world’s first all-private astronaut crew to witness the largest window ever flown in space for the first time.
In front of the camera: Hayley Arceneaux, now the youngest American astronaut in history and the first person ever to fly in space (or orbit) with an internal prosthetic. The mission: Inspiration4, a philanthropic creation of billionaire and CEO Jared Isaacman heavily focused on raising money (and awareness) for St. Jude’s Children’s Hospital and the fight against childhood cancer. While, as many an internet-goer will be more than eager to point out, Isaacman could have technically donated ~10% – not ~5% – of his net worth and been done with it, he instead decided to commit $100M to St. Jude’s and shepherd the world’s first all-private crewed orbital spaceflight into existence.
Private orbital spaceflight is not unique – seven other paying customers have flown to orbit and back in the 21st century. What Jared conceived of, however, is. Instead of a rather less inspirational mishmash of anyone rich enough to pay ~$20-40M for a seat, Isaacman chose to invite three relatively ordinary people along for the ride and even raffled one of the three ‘tickets’ to any American willing to donate $10 or more to the fight against childhood cancer. A step further, thanks to an excellent and transparent social media presence, millions of people from around the world got to follow the mission’s progress, watch a large portion of it live, and generally be awed by an important step forward for spaceflight and inspired by one of the most simultaneously eclectic and ordinary astronaut crew of all time.
More to the point, millions of people (or at least hundreds of thousands, for now) wouldn’t have gotten to vicariously experience the sheer joy of the first orbital cancer survivor experiencing the largest, most uninterrupted window ever flown in space for the first time. Officially known as the ‘cupola,’ SpaceX conceived of, designed, built, qualified, and flew the massive dome window in less than a year from start to finish.
Measuring around 1.2m (3.9 ft) wide and around 0.8-1m (2.5-3.2 ft) wide on the inside, Inspiration4’s cupola might offer less internal volume than NASA’s decade-old International Space Station cupola, but it makes up for the tighter space with the largest seamless window ever flown in space. Likely made out of several layers of acrylic domes not dissimilar to the ‘bubbles’ one might come across at aquariums, the innermost ‘layer’ of Dragon’s cupola carries an odd brownish hue but the glass (technically plastic) is still almost completely transparent and has no ‘frame’ or interruptions save for where it attaches to the spacecraft itself.
Thankfully, by all appearances, that brownish hue – perhaps some kind of optical coating or a tint to reduce glare – isn’t easily discernable from the inside looking out. Instead, the uninterrupted window practically melts away into a crystal-clear nothing, offering what has to be one of the best views available in space.
Given that SpaceX reportedly turned Dragon’s cupola from idea to reality in the matter of a single year and for a single customer, it’s difficult to imagine what additional upgrades could be realized on future Dragon spacecraft. Already, a senior SpaceX director says that the company is seriously considering building one or several new Dragons solely for private astronaut launches after receiving a massive uptick in demand for tickets to orbit. Even before Inspiration4 had splashed down, CEO Elon Musk promised that future flights would offer in-flight internet and hot food with the addition of a small oven/heater and a connection to the company’s own Starlink satellite constellation.
If SpaceX were to build an entirely new Dragon just for private free-flyer launches, it could potentially implement significant design changes as long as they didn’t appreciably lower safety. Given that an exclusively free-flying Dragon would never need to worry about docking in orbit, SpaceX might even be able to tweak the nosecone and make the cupola wider and taller. The possibilities may be far from endless but the fact that SpaceX would consider a modification as extreme as the cupola that flew on Inspiration4 in the first place suggests that the company is quite a lot more confident – and more willing to make big changes – than one might have previously guessed.
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.
The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.
Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:
“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”
The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:
“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”
Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
