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.
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
