News
SpaceX’s second astronaut launch a step closer after NASA announcement
SpaceX’s second astronaut launch is a a step closer to flight after NASA and JAXA announced the third and fourth astronauts assigned to ride Crew Dragon to the International Space Station (ISS) on its first operational mission.
On the cusp of March 30th and 31st, the Japanese Space Agency (JAXA) made the first Crew Dragon-related announcement of the day, revealing the assignment of astronaut Soichi Noguchi to SpaceX’s Crew-1 launch. Hinging entirely on the success of SpaceX’s imminent Demo-2 astronaut launch debut, a critical demonstration mission scheduled to launch no earlier than mid-to-late May 2020, Crew Dragon’s Crew-1 mission will be the spacecraft’s first operational mission ferrying humans to and from the space station. NASA followed up JAXA’s announced hours later, revealing that astronaut Shannon Walker would be the fourth and final crew member aboard Crew Dragon’s Crew-1 launch.
Including Boeing’s Starliner and SpaceX’s Crew Dragon crewed demonstration missions, known as the Crewed Flight Test and Demonstration Mission 2 (Demo-2 or DM-2), respectively, NASA has purchased six astronaut launches from both providers. In theory, one Starliner and Crew Dragon launch per year – spaced out six or so months apart – should be enough to meet NASA’s space station transportation needs, meaning that the space agency’s 12 contracts should last until 2025 or 2026. Boeing’s Starliner appears to be delayed indefinitely after multiple near-catastrophic failures on its first Orbital Flight Test (OFT) but if SpaceX’s Demo-2 mission goes as planned, Crew Dragon could be set to enter operational duty as early as Q4 2020.
SpaceX’s Crew-1 mission manifest now includes NASA astronauts Mike Hopkins, Victor Glover, and Shannon Walker, as well as JAXA astronaut Soichi Noguchi and will likely carry an additional 100-200 kg (200-400 lb) of cargo to the International Space Station (ISS). While all eyes are reasonably on Crew Dragon’s Demo-2 mission, right now, the spacecraft’s Crew-1 through -5 missions are where SpaceX has the opportunity to gain extensive experience launching humans on an operational, semi-routine basis.
Making up at least half of the backbone of NASA’s new domestic astronaut launch capabilities, Crew Dragon and Falcon 9 will hopefully prove themselves to be as reliable and dependable as they and their predecessors have been over the years. Cargo Dragon, SpaceX’s first orbital-class spacecraft and the first private vehicle to visit the ISS, has successfully resupplied the space station and safely returned to Earth each of the 20 times the spacecraft reached orbit. Unsurprisingly, SpaceX ran into intermittent technical issues over those numerous flights, but all of those anomalies were solved on the fly and never prevented mission success or spacecraft recovery.
Falcon 9’s first in-flight failure destroyed the CRS-7 Cargo Dragon spacecraft in June 2015 and cut the mission short before it could reach orbit, but the failure was entirely unrelated to Dragon. Falcon 9’s second catastrophic failure occurred less than 15 months later, also a fault of a small but explosive rocket design flaw. From January 2017 to March 2020, however, Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy rockets have completed 58 consecutively successful launches. With that streak of success, by certain measures, Falcon has become the most reliable operational rocket family in the world, tied with ULA’s famously reliable Atlas V and slightly better than Arianespace’s Ariane 5.
In short, while Cargo Dragon can’t hold a candle to the sheer scale of Russia’s Soyuz and Progress spacecraft flight histories, Falcon 9 is one of the two most reliable launch vehicles in operation and Crew Dragon will stand on the back of one of the most reliable spacecraft ever built in recent history. With (perhaps more than a little) luck, Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft – launched atop Atlas V, the other most reliable operational rocket – will hopefully be able to develop its own record of reliability in the next several years, but it will never be able to compete with the Cargo Dragon heritage Crew Dragon directly benefits from.
Boeing’s next Starliner mission is up in the air after the spacecraft’s almost disastrous orbital launch debut. Most likely, NASA will require a second uncrewed flight test, this time including the space station rendezvous, docking, and departure attempt Boeing had to cancel after Starliner’s major software failure. A second OFT would likely be ready for flight no earlier than Q3 or Q4 2020, depending on NASA’s investigation findings and requirements. If NASA remains confident and things go perfectly during the likely OFT2 mission, Starliner’s Crew Flight Test (CFT) could maybe launch by the end of 2020.
Crew Dragon’s Demo-2 astronaut launch debut is aiming for what NASA says is a mid-to-late May launch, although the mission is more likely to fly in the late-May to mid-June time frame. If Demo-2 launches on schedule (H1 2020) and is as flawless as Crew Dragon’s uncrewed Demo-1 launch debut, SpaceX could be ready to launch its second astronaut mission (Crew-1) as early as Q4 2020, possibly around the start of the quarter. With so much contingent on near-term reviews and tests, schedules beyond Demo-2 are unsurprisingly fluid.
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.
In a new interview on Wednesday, Tesla uber bull Ron Baron said that anyone looking to buy the company’s stock should do so as soon as they can.
Baron, founder and CEO of Baron Capital and one of Tesla’s most persistent institutional bulls, used a CNBC Squawk Box appearance on Wednesday to deliver a familiar message with fresh urgency: In his opinion, Tesla stock is a buy:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.”
The Baron Capital frontman’s case is built around Full Self-Driving. Tesla reported 1.48 million active FSD subscriptions in the second quarter, up 56 percent year over year, and company officials have said roughly 55 percent of new North American deliveries left with a subscription enabled.
Baron framed that attach rate as proof the product is moving from enthusiast extra to default expectation, and as a reason software, not just vehicle volume, should drive the next phase of value.
His conviction on Tesla shares is not theoretical, as Baron Capital made its first Tesla investment in 2014, after years of meetings that began around the 2010 IPO roadshow. The firm later built a large SpaceX position starting in 2017.
Ron Baron today in new interview on Tesla:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.” pic.twitter.com/Rv5PB0bVZ2
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) September 16, 2026
Baron said those Musk-led bets have generated about $30 billion of the $71 billion in profits Baron Capital has produced for clients. He put the firm’s current exposure at roughly $25 billion in SpaceX and $5 billion in Tesla. Personally, he described SpaceX as his largest holding, at about $5 billion, with about $1.5 billion in Tesla and additional Tesla exposure through the firm’s funds.
That concentration is also a statement of loyalty. Asked about talk of a SpaceX-Tesla combination, Baron said he had already walked Elon Musk through arguments for and against a deal, then declined to repeat them on air. His public position was simpler: “Whatever you decide is better is what I’m going to support,” he said to Musk.
Baron also said that he picked up the farewell edition of the Model S after Tesla decided to sunset the vehicle earlier this year, calling it his favorite car he’s ever driven.
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
