News
SpaceX attempts second Falcon fairing drop test with a helicopter and Mr. Steven
Following a few days of rest in port, SpaceX fairing recovery vessel Mr. Steven has continued a likely campaign of controlled drop tests with a second fairing recovery attempt, using a helicopter, spotter plane, and support vessel to pick up a Falcon fairing and drop it, theoretically allowing it to paraglide into Mr. Steven’s net.
While it’s nearly impossible to determine what happened without line-of-sight visual confirmation or an official announcement from SpaceX, it appears that Mr. Steven kicked off real catch attempts on October 11th, evidenced by his close interaction with a Blackhawk helicopter over the course of an hour or so. Another similar attempt occurred today, October 17th, and culminated with Mr. Steven returning once more to Port of San Pedro with the same test-focused fairing half on board, albeit not resting in his retracted net.
- SpaceX’s dedicated test fairing seen at Berth 240 on Oct. 15, a few days after its first apparent drop test. (Pauline Acalin)
- Mr. Steven and a recent arrival, barge PTS 185. The fairing cradle on deck suggests that this is probably the platform helicopters grab the fairing half off of. (Pauline Acalin)
After October 11th’s testing was completed, Mr. Steven returned to Port of San Pedro. On October 13th, he was docked at SpaceX’s Berth 240 facilities with net lowered and the test fairing half wrapped up on the docks, preventing confirmation of whether he carried the fairing half back from the testing region. A mid-sized barge also recently appeared at Berth 240 with a distinct Falcon fairing cradle onboard, perhaps explaining the presence of a tugboat (named Sir Richard) a few miles away from where this test campaign has been stationed – a barge would offer a flat, safe surface for a helicopter to hover over and pick up an unwieldy object such as a payload fairing.
Nearly identical to the October 11th test, Mr. Steven, tug Sir Richard, a Cessna chase plane, and a Blackhawk helicopter all converged around 100 miles southwest of Port of Los Angeles around 2pm PDT on October 17th prior to beginning recovery test operations. Mr. Steven and the tug Sir Richard – likely towing a barge being temporarily used to move a fairing half – arrived several hours beforehand at the test’s planned location.
- As of late, SpaceX technicians and engineers have going through quite a range of activities related to fairing recovery. (Pauline Acalin)
- A gif demonstrates just how taut Mr Steven’s net can be, thanks to mechanized rigging. 08/13/18 (Pauline Acalin)
- Mr. Steven returned to Port of San Pedro around 7pm on October 8th after a day spent at sea, apparently with a Falcon fairing half in tow. This is the second known time that a fairing has been in Mr. Steven’s net. (Pauline Acalin)
- One half of SpaceX’s Iridium-6/GRACE-FO just moments before touchdown on the Pacific Ocean. (SpaceX)
Eventually, a UH-60A Blackhawk helicopter – the same helicopter used on October 11 – lifted off from Catalina Island’s Avalon airport, taking about half an hour to reach Mr. Steven and Sir Richard. Once there, the helicopter very distinctly slowed down, eventually hovering just ~20 feet off the surface of the ocean, if not outright landing or perching on the aforementioned barge under the tug’s control. After several minutes in that state, the Blackhawk lifted off and immediately began climbing, reaching a peak of ~11,000 ft before (presumably) dropping its fairing payload and immediately diving down to follow its descent.
It’s undoubtedly an imperfect fit, but the helicopter appeared to follow Mr. Steven very closely over the course of the recovery attempt, sticking just a ~1500 ft or less above and a few hundred feet beside him as he raced to catch the falling fairing half. In fact, at least as a very rough approximation, the helicopter’s descent may be useful to judge the fairing’s behavior while gliding: taking ~14 minutes to travel descend 11,000ft and travel perhaps 2 miles (~10,500ft) horizontally, the fairing would dropped at a reasonable 13.1 feet per second (~4 m/s) once its parafoil opened and seemed to travel approximately one foot forward for every one foot down, also known as a 1:1 glide slope ratio.
And here's a little overview of the helicopter's path, mixed with a speed/altitude graph! Added some rough annotations to give an idea of what happened and in what time frame 😀 pic.twitter.com/e1rwZtkNHA
— Eric Ralph (@13ericralph31) October 18, 2018
Depending on wind conditions, parafoils can nominally be expected to achieve average glide slope ratios between 0 (high winds; falling like a literal rock) and 4 (no winds; almost as good as a bad airplane), meaning that Falcon fairings – judging from tangential data gathered from the helicopter following its descent – fly much like a parafoil, which is to say not great but better than a brick. The trick with parafoil control – which includes tweaking angles of attack and glide slope – lies more in the art of trading forward velocity for vertical velocity (or vice versa) at key moments. Assuming their control mechanisms have enough authority, paragliding fairings could ‘flare’ as they near Mr. Steven’s net, essentially angling upwards to briefly hover before dropping quickly, maybe giving the boat enough time to swoop in and place its net just beneath it.
In this way, a parafoil’s flexible, inflated wing (airfoil, to be precise) can allow it to maneuver quite a lot like a bird, at least more so than most other methods of flying humans have access to. Time will tell if SpaceX is having any luck perfecting the guidance and recovery of Falcon fairings, particularly with this campaign of under-the-radar drop tests. Even if Mr. Steven returns with a fairing half resting in his net, it will be more than a little ambiguous if it was placed there or he caught it, and any certainty will rely on official confirmation from SpaceX itself.
For prompt updates, on-the-ground perspectives, and unique glimpses of SpaceX’s rocket recovery fleet check out our brand new LaunchPad and LandingZone newsletters!
News
Tesla shows rapid teardown of Model S and X lines, paving the way for Optimus at Fremont
Tesla shared a striking video showcasing the decommissioning of the original Model S and Model X assembly line at its Fremont Factory in Northern California. Completed in just 46 days, the teardown involved heavy machinery dismantling concrete pits, removing robotic arms and conveyors, and clearing the space for new production.
The post, captioned “End of an era,” captured both the end of a historic chapter and Tesla’s aggressive pivot toward its next major initiative, Optimus.
End of an era: Decommissioning the original Model S & X assembly line in just 46 days pic.twitter.com/kGEdfhl62h
— Tesla Manufacturing (@gigafactories) July 10, 2026
The decision to retire the Model S and Model X originated during Tesla’s Q4 2025 Earnings Call in late January 2026. CEO Elon Musk announced that production of the company’s flagship sedan and SUV would wind down by the end of Q2 2026, describing it as bringing the programs to an “honorable discharge.”
Custom orders ceased around early April 2026, with the final vehicles rolling off the line in early May. A special signature delivery ceremony on May 20 marked the emotional close for these vehicles, which had defined Tesla’s early success and luxury EV segment since the Model S launch in 2012.
The primary reason for tearing down the lines was to repurpose the valuable factory floor space for high-volume production of Tesla’s Optimus humanoid robot. Musk had indicated on Earnings Calls that the Fremont S/X line would be replaced by a dedicated Optimus manufacturing line targeting a capacity of one million units per year.
This move aligns with Tesla’s broader strategic shift from traditional vehicle manufacturing toward robotics and artificial intelligence, leveraging the company’s expertise in autonomy, AI training, and high-volume production.
Optimus, Tesla’s general-purpose humanoid robot, is designed to perform repetitive or dangerous tasks in factories, warehouses, and eventually homes. Powered by Tesla’s AI and Neural Networks, it aims to be a versatile, affordable platform. Production of Optimus Gen 3 is already underway in limited form at Fremont, with full-scale output on the converted line expected to begin in late July or August.
Tesla is targeting rapid scaling, with internal ambitions pointing toward tens or even hundreds of thousands of units annually by the end of 2026.
Longer-term, Tesla is constructing a much larger second-generation Optimus facility at Giga Texas, with potential capacity reaching millions of units per year. The company views Optimus as a transformative product that could eventually surpass its automotive business in scale and value, enabling widespread deployment of useful robots across industries. CEO Elon Musk has even predicted it would be the most popular product of all-time.
As one era closes at Fremont, another is rapidly taking shape.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk admits he was ‘clearly wrong’ about Anthropic
Elon Musk posted a candid admission on his social media platform X on June 9, declaring that he had been “clearly wrong” about Anthropic. The statement marked a notable reversal from his earlier skepticism toward the AI company.
In September, Musk had written, “Winning was never in the set of possible outcomes for Anthropic,” reflecting his view at the time that the startup had lacked the foundation or even the trajectory to succeed in what is an incredibly intense race for advanced artificial intelligence.
Musk’s latest post came amid discussion of Anthropic’s reliance on external compute resources. He praised the company’s progress, stating that Anthropic is “obviously currently the leader in AI” and that “no company has released a model as good as Mythos/Fable,” with expectations of a strong follow-up in Mythos 2.
The tone shifted dramatically from dismissal to acknowledgement of superior performance.
I was clearly wrong about Anthropic. They are obviously currently the leader in AI. No company has released a model as good as Mythos/Fable and they will undoubtedly have Mythos 2 ready soon.
And I would never cut them off in a way that hurt them badly, even as a competitor.…
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 9, 2026
The context of Musk’s comments added significance. Anthropic has been operating under a recent compute deal with SpaceXAI, Musk’s AI infrastructure-focused venture. The pair entered a short-term GPU lease agreement initiated in May, providing Anthropic access to critical computing power for training and deploying its frontier models.
SpaceXAI signs agreement with Anthropic for massive AI supercomputer access
Some observers had speculated that Musk could leverage this dependency to disadvantage a rival. Musk directly addressed the possibility, writing, “I would never cut them off in a way that hurt them badly, even as a competitor. That’s not my style.”
To support his commitment to ethical competition, Musk referenced concrete examples from his other companies. Tesla famously open-sourced its entire portfolio of electric vehicle patents in 2014. The move was designed to accelerate the global adoption of sustainable transportation technology rather than protect proprietary advantages.
Tesla also made its Supercharger network available to competing electric vehicle manufacturers, transforming what could have remained an exclusive charging ecosystem into a shared infrastructure that benefits the broader industry and reduces barriers for EV adoption.
Musk further pointed to SpaceX’s practices, noting that the company launches satellites for competing commercial systems “with no increase in price or use of unfair terms.” He extended the principle to his social platform, observing that “even my worst enemies attack me on this platform,” underscoring preference for open discourse over retaliation.
These examples have illustrated Musk’s long-standing philosophy that long-term technological progress is best served by open competition and infrastructure sharing rather than leveraging market power to stifle rivals. In the fast-evolving AI sector, where compute resources and model capabilities determine leadership, Musk’s stance suggests a willingness to compete on innovation and performance alone.
Musk’s admission arrives as SpaceXAI itself advances its own frontier models while maintaining business relationships across the ecosystem. By publicly correcting his earlier assessment and reaffirming principles of fair play, Musk highlights a model of competition that prioritizes advancement of the field over short-term tactical advantages.
News
Tesla analyst says Full Self-Driving is about to have its iPhone moment
A Tesla analyst believes the company’s Full Self-Driving suite is close to an “inflection point,” where people will finally realize that it is more than what it appears, similar to how many view the iPhone.
Pierre Ferragu, an analyst who has covered Tesla for many years at New Street Research, says the Full Self-Driving suite is one piece of evidence supporting the view that a Tesla is more than a car. He compared it to the iPhone and noted that the high price tag seemed like a lot for a phone early on. Then people realized the iPhone was more than just something you make calls with. It made their lives simpler.
🚨 Analyst @p_ferragu says Tesla Full Self-Driving is at an “inflection point” in a recent commentary:
“A Tesla is not a car, the same way an iPhone was not a phone. As a tool that gets you to work peacefully every morning, it is not expensive. Give us 2 more quarters to see… pic.twitter.com/tm6xFrjVPV
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 10, 2026
Suddenly, that price tag was justified.
Tesla offers several models under the average transaction price for a new vehicle, which was above $49,000, according to Kelley Blue Book. However, that does not take into account that many people can still not afford a $35,000 vehicle. Ferragu offers his thoughts:
“Remember when the addressable market of the iPhone was 10 million units? Then people realized how good it was, and now, nearly 250m are sold every year.
A similar evolution for Tesla is still on the table. A Tesla is not a car, the same way an iPhone was not a phone.
A model 3 at $35k + $100 per month is too expensive for most, but only as a car, the same way a $600 iPhone was too expensive for most, until most realized it was much more than a phone.
As a tool that gets you to work peacefully every morning, it is not expensive.”
This point is valid, especially considering the iPhone’s impact on the cell phone market. There are still a handful of players, but most people you know have an iPhone. The iPhone ties into Apple’s other ecosystem of products.
This is how Tesla plans to infiltrate the automotive market, and once the company offers a fully autonomous suite, or something that can allow for unsupervised self-driving, more and more people will flock to Tesla.
Ferragu believes Tesla needs two additional quarters of development before things will truly change. He didn’t elaborate on what will happen in two quarters, but he said it will give us all time to “see where this is heading.”
It is really quite interesting to see people’s reactions when they find out what a Tesla is capable of. Full Self-Driving is a great tool for taking stress out of travel; I use it daily, and it has made it really difficult to consider taking any other car on a drive of practically any length.
To me, it is really hard to believe that people will not at least seriously consider a Tesla as their next car if they experience Full Self-Driving. This is a major point for those who argue that Tesla should advertise in some way.





