News
SpaceX wins NASA approval to launch astronauts on reused rockets and spacecraft
SpaceX appears to have won NASA’s approval to launch astronauts on reused Falcon 9 rockets and Crew Dragon spacecraft a matter of days after the company’s astronaut launch debut went off without a hitch.
Ever since SpaceX began landing and reusing orbital-class Falcon 9 boosters some 15 months after it won a NASA contract to develop Crew Dragon, the obvious possibility that the two groundbreaking technologies might one day meet has always floated just under the surface. Almost without fail, most joint NASA/SpaceX press conferences will receive a question or two about whether either party is thinking about or working towards astronaut launches on flight-proven spacecraft. Encouraged by the fact that partner Boeing’s separate Starliner spacecraft was sold to NASA with reusability in mind from the start, those questions continued up until (and after) the day SpaceX became the first private company in history to launch astronauts into orbit.
In a wholly unexpected turn of events, a modification to SpaceX’s ~$3.1 billion NASA Commercial Crew Program (CCP) contract was spotted on June 3rd. Without leaving much room for interpretation, the contract tweak states that SpaceX is now “[allowed to reuse] the Falcon 9 launch vehicle and Crew Dragon spacecraft beginning with” its second operational astronaut launch, known as Post Certification Mission-2 (PCM-2) or Crew-2. Given the spectacular, hiccup-free success of SpaceX’s inaugural astronaut launch and International Space Station (ISS) arrival just 3-4 days prior, it’s safe to say that NASA is extremely happy with the results of the mission.
Without a shred of doubt, SpaceX has worked tirelessly for years to earn enough of NASA’s technical trust to permit crewed launches on flight-proven hardware, a possibility that even the optimists in the crowd assumed was distant at best. It has almost always been an uphill battle for SpaceX – a fact made especially clear when framed beside partner Boeing. An inherently conservative organization, NASA has repeatedly given Boeing and its more traditional Starliner spacecraft and development approach the benefit of the doubt while frequently tearing into the nooks and crannies of SpaceX and Crew Dragon over half a decade of cooperation.
While functioning more like an anchor when SpaceX finds itself working with conservative, stubborn organizations like NASA and US military branches, the company’s wholly non-traditional style of development has secured technical success after technical success. Over the course of the second half of SpaceX’s 20-mission NASA Commercial Resupply Services 1 (CRS1) contract, the company has still managed to successfully launch dozens of tons of cargo to the space station with flight-proven spacecraft and boosters. From CRS-11 to CRS-20, five missions featured reused Falcon 9 boosters and all but one of those 10 flights featured once or even twice-flown Cargo Dragon spacecraft.
In short, SpaceX has demonstrated more than a dozen times to NASA that it’s fully capable of building, launching, and reusing orbital-class rockets and spacecraft. Additionally, before an unrelated design flaw destroyed the spacecraft during post-recovery testing, SpaceX successfully launched, recovered, and refurbished Crew Dragon capsule C201 in March 2019, demonstrating its dramatically improved reusability. While suborbital, Crew Dragon C205’s January 2020 In-Flight Abort (IFA) test also likely helped demonstrate the new spacecraft’s reusability and gave NASA more experience with the reuse of Falcon 9 Block 5 rockets as B1046’s fourth launch.
Every step along the way, SpaceX has put its money where its mouth is and proven that it’s more than capable of doing what much larger, more traditional companies have only claimed to be capable of – and often months or even years before its competitors and for hundreds of millions to billions of dollars less. While it’s much more likely that NASA has yet to actually certify SpaceX’s Crew Dragon spacecraft and Falcon 9 boosters for flight-proven astronaut launches, the June 3rd contract modification – at a minimum – signifies the space agency’s expeditious intent to do so. What is unambiguous is the schedule it lays out: SpaceX could potentially launch astronauts on a flight-proven rocket and spacecraft as early as its second operational taxi mission to the ISS.
Known as PCM-2 or Crew-2, the mission is scheduled to follow Crew Dragon’s first operational astronaut launch – Crew-1 – by roughly six months. Contingent upon Crew Dragon Demo-2’s safe return of NASA astronauts Bob Behnken and Doug Hurley later this year, Crew-1 is tentatively scheduled to launch on August 30th, although it could potentially launch even sooner. If successful, Crew-2 should follow as soon as mid-2021 and could potentially reuse Crew-1’s Falcon 9 booster and the Demo-2 or Crew-1 Dragon capsule.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
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 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.
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.
Tesla shows rapid teardown of Model S and X lines, paving the way for Optimus at Fremont
Elon Musk admits he was ‘clearly wrong’ about Anthropic
