News
SpaceX "DARKSAT" results: can Starlink and astronomy happily coexist?
Astronomers have begun to gather and analyze detailed observations of a SpaceX Starlink satellite prototype officially labeled DARKSAT and the initial results hint that the satellite constellation should be able to happily coexist with ground-based astronomy in the future.
Since SpaceX began launching batches of 60 Starlink satellites in May 2019, the company has raised the ire of parts of the astronomy community and simultaneously awed and inspired many less technical observers with clusters of shooting star-like satellites that are easily visible after launches. While the mid-sized spacecraft do become much dimmer as they raise their orbits from ~300 km (185 mi) to 550 km (340 mi), they are far from invisible even at that operational altitude. It’s safe to say that the current impact on ground-based astronomy is still just shy of negligible even with 360 satellites in orbit, but that impact is assuredly greater than zero and the relatively bright spacecraft have already interrupted telescope observations at many sites around the world.
Given that the 360 satellites already in orbit are just a tiny fraction of the ~4400, ~12,000, or even ~40,000 that SpaceX could one day launch, it would be irresponsible to argue that the constellation’s impact – and the impact of others like it – will continue to be minor as the number of satellites grows. Thankfully, while it doesn’t appear that prospective low Earth orbit (LEO) constellation architects anticipated the potential astronomy impact, SpaceX’s Starlink team has rapidly responded and already launched a satellite featuring tweaks designed to dim its appearance from the ground. For several reasons, the initial results from “DARKSAT” are extremely promising – now visible below in some of the first photos offering a useful comparison.
Launched on January 7th, 2020, a set of 20 spacecraft including DARKSAT – representing a single “plane” of the broader Starlink constellation – all arrived at their operational ~550 km (340 mi) orbits by February 23rd. As previously discussed on Teslarati, initial results first published on March 18th revealed that the Starlink DARKSAT prototype – essentially an early alpha test for darkening techniques – was already 55% darker than unmodified spacecraft. While making satellites less reflective makes thermal management a much greater challenge, DARKSAT has managed to raise its orbit and begin operations without issue, although it’s unknown whether the satellite’s antennas and avionics are also functioning nominally.
For darker spacecraft, perhaps the most important test will be long-term reliability, as constantly absorbing more heat than a reflective satellite is likely to put their structure, avionics, and radiators through significantly more thermal stress. As such, SpaceX may launch a limited number of additional darkened prototypes over the coming months but is much less likely to darken all satellites on any given launch until DARKSATs have successfully operated in orbit for months or even years.
On the ground, SpaceX may try to perform sped-up stress testing, but proving that darker satellites are a viable solution will almost invariably take time. Earlier this month, CEO Elon Musk revealed that SpaceX may attempt to design deployable solar shades for Starlink satellites if darkening their bodies is not enough to fully mitigate major impacts to astronomy. Knowing SpaceX, the first in-orbit solar shade test(s) could happen during any of several upcoming Starlink launches.
Adding reliable, deployable solar shades without appreciably raising Starlink’s production costs could be a major challenge, given the fundamental complexity of large, deployable mechanisms in space, but SpaceX – if anyone – is likely up to the challenge. More importantly, the fact that SpaceX’s very first attempt at reducing Starlink albedo (reflectivity) has produced a satellite 55% darker than its peers suggests that much more can probably be done along those lines, given additional time for extra experiments and deeper optimization.
As a result, it may be the case that SpaceX ends up launching 750-1000+ reflective Starlink satellites before an affordable, mass-producible DARKSAT variant is ready to take over. In that event, Starlink could plausibly have a small to moderate negative impact on ground-based astronomy for several years. However, comments made by SpaceX executives over the years suggest that no single Starlink satellite is likely to operate for more than five or so years before being replaced, meaning that the entire constellation would be continuously refreshed (as long as it’s generating revenue). Even if a thousand bright(er) Starlink satellites make life a bit harder for some astronomers, the fact remains that the consequences of any single Starlink satellite variant – assuming SpaceX remains serious about fully mitigating the constellation’s impact – are inherently temporary.
If SpaceX continues to make progress darkening satellites and developing cheap solar shades, it seems all but guaranteed that even a constellation of tens of thousands of Starlink satellites will be able happily coexist with the astronomy community, all the while delivering cheap, fast internet to millions of people – especially those lacking access – around the world.
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
