News
SpaceX has no plans to reuse Crew Dragon spaceships on NASA astronaut launches
According to program manager Kathy Lueders, SpaceX has chosen against reusing its upgraded Crew Dragon spaceships on NASA Commerical Crew Program (CCP) launches, even though NASA itself explicitly provided both CCP providers (Boeing and SpaceX) the option to propose reflights of crew capsules.
In fact, Boeing did just that with their CST-100 Starliner spacecraft, proposing to land Starliners on land (using airbags) and reuse the capsules repeatedly, up to 10 times each. While there is next to no official information on the matter, the question of what SpaceX is planning to do with its flight-proven Crew Dragon spacecraft is well worth puzzling over.
The Crew Dragon capsule for the SpaceX DM-1 mission will be launch ready by the end of September. pic.twitter.com/xsGw9fWkUG
— Michael Baylor (@MichaelBaylor_) August 27, 2018
The future of flight-proven Dragon 2s
Speaking at the most recent (August 27) NASA Advisory Council meeting, Lueders specifically stated that SpaceX had proposed “a new vehicle every time for [NASA]”, although NASA specifically provided the option for either new or reflown hardware, similar to Commercial Cargo where SpaceX already routinely reflies both Falcon 9s and Cargo Dragons on official NASA resupply missions.
The fact that SpaceX already routinely reuses Cargo Dragons – and even does so atop flight-proven Falcon 9 rocket boosters – adds additional intrigue to this seemingly odd decision. However, in the context of other near-term plans for other Dragon-related activities, SpaceX’s choice to not (at least in the near-term) refly Crew Dragon capsules for crewed NASA launches makes more than a little sense.
-
- DM-1 seen conducting acoustic testing in Ohio. (SpaceX)
-
- Falcon 9 B1051, DM-1’s rocket of choice, seen during construction in SpaceX’s Hawthorne factory. (SpaceX)
-
- (SpaceX)
-
- (SpaceX)
The single most obvious explanation can be found in SpaceX’s next Commercial Resupply Services contract (CRS-2), a similar follow-up to the CRS-1 contract SpaceX is currently launching Cargo Dragons under. Although SpaceX offered its Dragon 1 (already flying) as an option, NASA sided with Dragon 2 thanks to a number of unique and valuable capabilities offered by the upgraded craft. While no official detail has been released by NASA on the gritty specifics of those CRS-2 contracts, an April 2018 report from the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) offers a bit more insight into SpaceX’s plans.
Although the OIG report in question never specifically states it, some of the language used to describe Dragon 2’s cargo configuration does seem to imply that Cargo Dragon 2s will predominately (if not exclusively) be derived as slightly-modified Crew Dragon capsules, seemingly indicating that SpaceX’s CRS-2 missions may only ever launch flight-proven Crew Dragon capsules. Depending on the extent of the disassembly required to remove the components described below, all other “modifications” are essentially one-and-done after the software and additional designs are completed. As such, it should be relatively straightforward to modify the vehicles between Crew and Cargo configurations.
-
- An overview of the expected modifications needed to turn a Crew Dragon into a Cargo Dragon 2. (NASA OIG)
This strategy would make a lot of sense: by using its Commercial Crew contract as a means to fund the construction of brand new Crew Dragon capsules and Falcon 9 rockets and then using those once flight-proven rockets and spacecraft for other NASA cargo launches, general commercial missions, and maybe even low Earth orbit tourism, SpaceX can likely extract as much value and utility as possible from that hardware.
Despite the fact that NASA in this situation would effectively be carrying a significant portion of SpaceX’s non-BFR production-related capital expenditure, the company’s CRS-2 and Commercial Crew contracts place its cargo and crew launch costs far below those of competitors Boeing, Orbital ATK (now Northrop Grumman Innovation Systems), and Sierra Nevada. Overall, SpaceX’s launch costs to NASA range anywhere from 40-75% less than its three competitors’ best offerings, essentially invalidating any nitpicking over slight cost increases from CRS-1 to CRS-2.
Even if SpaceX never ends up reusing Crew Dragons on crewed NASA launches, NASA is still likely to benefit from lower costs derived by the partial modification and reuse of those same capsules and Falcon 9 boosters on CRS-2 cargo resupply missions.
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 VP explains latest updates in trade secret theft case
Tesla reportedly caught Matthews copying the tech into machines that were sold to competitors, claiming they lied about doing so for three years, and continued to ship it. That is when Tesla chose to sue Matthews in July 2024 in Federal court, demanding over $1 billion in damages due to trade secret theft.
Tesla Vice President Bonne Eggleston explained the latest updates in a trade secret theft case the company has against a former manufacturing equipment supplier, Matthews International.
Back in 2024, Tesla had filed a lawsuit against Matthews International, alleging that the firm stole trade secrets about battery manufacturing and shared those details with some of Tesla’s competitors.
Early last year, a U.S. District Court Judge denied Tesla’s request to block Matthews International from selling its dry battery electrode (DBE) technology across the world. The judge, Edward Davila, said that the patent for the tech was due to Matthews’ “extensive research and development.”
The two companies’ relationship began back in 2019, as Tesla hired Matthews to help build the equipment for its 4680 battery cell. Tesla shared confidential software, designs, and know-how under strict secrecy rules.
Fast forward a few years, and Tesla reportedly caught Matthews copying the tech into machines that were sold to competitors, claiming they lied about doing so for three years, and continued to ship it. That is when Tesla chose to sue Matthews in July 2024 in Federal court, demanding over $1 billion in damages due to trade secret theft.
Now, the latest twist, as this month, a Judge issued a permanent injunction—a court order banning Matthews from using certain stolen Tesla parts or designs in their machines. Matthews is also officially “liable” for damages. The exact amount would still to be calculated later.
Bonne Eggleston, a VP for Tesla, said on X today that Matthews is a supplier who “exploited customer IP through theft or deception,” and has no place in Tesla’s ecosystem:
Buyer beware: Matthews International stole Tesla’s DBE technology and is now subject to an injunction and liable for damages.
During our work with Matthews, we caught them red-handed copying our technology—including proprietary software and sensitive mechanical designs—into… https://t.co/Toc8ilakeM
— Bonne Eggleston (@BonneEggleston) March 10, 2026
Tesla calls this a big win and warns other companies: “Buyer beware—don’t buy from thieves.”
Matthews hit back with a press release claiming victory. They say an arbitrator ruled they can keep selling their own DBE equipment to anyone and rejected Tesla’s request for a total sales ban. They call Tesla’s claims “nonsense” and insist their 20-year-old tech is independent. Both sides are spinning the same narrow ruling: Matthews can sell their version, but they’re blocked from using Tesla’s specific secrets.
What are Tesla’s Current Legal Options
The case isn’t over—it’s moving to the damages phase. Tesla can:
- Push forward in court or arbitration to calculate and collect huge financial penalties (potentially $1 billion+ if willful theft is proven).
- Enforce the permanent injunction with contempt charges, fines, or even jail time if Matthews violates it.
- Challenge Matthews’ new patents that allegedly copy Tesla’s work, asking courts to invalidate them or add Tesla as co-inventor.
- Seek extra damages, lawyer fees, and possibly punitive awards under the federal Defend Trade Secrets Act and California law.
Tesla could also refer evidence to federal prosecutors for possible criminal trade-secret charges (rare but serious). Settlement is always possible, but Tesla’s fiery public response suggests they want full accountability.
This isn’t just corporate drama. It shows why trade secrets matter even when Tesla open-sources some patents, confidential know-how shared in trust must stay protected. For the EV industry, it’s a reminder: steal from your biggest customer, and you risk losing everything.
News
Tesla Cybercab includes this small but significant feature
The Cybercab is Tesla’s big plan to introduce fully autonomous ride-sharing in a seamless fashion. In fact, the Full Self-Driving suite was geared toward alleviating the need to manually drive vehicles.
Tesla Cybercab manufacturing is strikingly close, as the company is still aiming for an April start date. But small and significant features are still being identified for the first time as production units appear all over the country for testing and for regulatory events, like one yesterday in Washington, D.C.
The Cybercab is Tesla’s big plan to introduce fully autonomous ride-sharing in a seamless fashion. In fact, the Full Self-Driving suite was geared toward alleviating the need to manually drive vehicles.
This was for everyone, including the disabled, who are widely reliant on ride-sharing platforms, family members, and medical shuttles for transportation of any kind. Cybercab aims to change that, and Tesla evidently put a focus on those riders while developing the vehicle, evident in a small but significant feature revealed during its appearance in the Nation’s Capital.
Tesla Cybercab display highlights interior wizardry in the small two-seater
Tesla has implemented Braille within the Cybercab to make it easier for blind passengers to utilize the vehicle. On both the ‘Stop/Hazard Lights’ button and the Door Releases, Tesla has placed Braille so that blind passengers can navigate their way through the vehicle:
The hazard lights button will be used as an emergency stop. Smart pic.twitter.com/vkYBioqmKm
— Whole Mars Catalog (@wholemars) March 10, 2026
We have braille on the interior door releases as well
— Eric (@EricETesla) March 11, 2026
This is a great addition to the Cybercab, especially as Full Self-Driving has been partially pointed at as a solution for those with disabilities that would keep them from driving themselves from place to place.
It truly is a great addition and just another way that Tesla is showing they are making this massive product inclusive for everyone out there, including those who have not been able to drive due to not having vision.
The Cybercab is set to enter mass production sometime in April, and it will be responsible for launching Tesla’s massive plans for an autonomous ride-sharing program.
Elon Musk
Tesla and xAI team up on massive new project
It is the latest move by a Musk company to automate, streamline, and reduce the manual, monotonous, and tedious work currently performed by humans through AI and robotics development. Digital Optimus will be capable of processing and actioning the past five seconds of a real-time computer screen video and keyboard and mouse actions.
Elon Musk teased a massive new project, to be developed jointly by Tesla and xAI, called “Digital Optimus” or “Macrohard,” the first development under Tesla’s investment agreement with xAI.
Musk announced on X that Digital Optimus will “be capable of emulating the function of entire companies.”
Macrohard or Digital Optimus is a joint xAI-Tesla project, coming as part of Tesla’s investment agreement with xAI.
Grok is the master conductor/navigator with deep understanding of the world to direct digital Optimus, which is processing and actioning the past 5 secs of…
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) March 11, 2026
It is the latest move by a Musk company to automate, streamline, and reduce the manual, monotonous, and tedious work currently performed by humans through AI and robotics development. Digital Optimus will be capable of processing and actioning the past five seconds of a real-time computer screen video and keyboard and mouse actions.
Essentially, it will be an AI version of a desk worker in many capacities, including accounting, HR tasks, and others.
Musk said:
“Grok is the master conductor/navigator with deep understanding of the world to direct digital Optimus, which is processing and actioning the past 5 secs of real-time computer screen video and keyboard/mouse actions. Grok is like a much more advanced and sophisticated version of turn-by-turn navigation software. You can think of it as Digital Optimus AI being System 1 (instinctive part of the mind) and Grok being System 2. (thinking part of the mind).”
Its key applications would be used for enterprise automation, simulating entire companies, high-volume repetitive tasks, and potentially, future hybrid use with the Optimus robot, which would handle physical tasks, while Digital Optimus would handle the clerical work.
The creation of a digital AI suite like Digital Optimus would help companies save time and money, as well as become more efficient in their operations through massive scalability. However, there will undoubtedly be concerns from people who are skeptical of a fully-integrated AI workhorse like this one.
From an energy consumption perspective and just a general concern for the human workforce, these types of AI projects are polarizing in nature.
However, Digital Optimus would be a great digital counterpart to Tesla’s physical Optimus robot, as it would be a hyper-efficient addition to any company that is looking for more production for less cost.
Musk maintains that there is no other company on Earth that will be able to do this.
Tesla VP explains latest updates in trade secret theft case
Tesla Cybercab includes this small but significant feature
