News
SpaceX announces second Starlink satellite launch in two weeks
SpaceX has announced its second planned Starlink satellite in two weeks, sticking to a trend that could see the company launch more than a thousand communications satellites over the next 12 months.
Barely two weeks after SpaceX opened media accreditation for Starlink-2, the second launch of finalized ‘v1.0’ satellites and third dedicated launch overall, the company has announced that that late-December mission will be followed by another Starlink launch in January 2020. This tracks almost exactly with SpaceX’s reported plans for as many as 24 dedicated Starlink launches in 2020, a feat that would singlehandedly break SpaceX’s current record of 21 launches performed in a single year.
As previously discussed on Teslarati, SpaceX opened media accreditation for Starlink-2 on November 24th, confirming that the company hopes to complete one more 60-satellite Starlink launch before the end of 2019. That mission is currently targeted no earlier than (NET) late-December and would be SpaceX’s last launch of 2019 if current schedules hold.
Regardless of when it happens, there’s a strong chance that the 60 Starlink-2 satellites will make SpaceX the world’s largest individual satellite operator, potentially raising the number of satellites under the company’s command to ~170. According to SpaceX’s announcement, Starlink-3 – another 60-satellite mission – is now scheduled to launch no earlier than January 2020. If Starlink-2 is successful and no more v0.9 spacecraft drop out of the operational constellation, it can be said with certainty that Starlink-3 will unequivocally make SpaceX the world’s largest satellite operator.
Incredibly, if those schedules hold, SpaceX will have gone from two satellites in orbit to the world’s largest satellite constellation operator – by a large margin – in as few as nine months. In fact, after cresting that peak, it will take nothing short of a miracle for SpaceX to be usurped. The company hopes to launch as many as 24 Starlink missions in 2020 and is simply miles ahead of its competitors in its efforts to make high-performance orbital launches as efficient and affordable as possible.
If SpaceX and its executives are to be believed, as early as the very first dedicated Starlink launch (May 2019), the cost of launching Falcon 9 was already significantly less than the cost of its payload of 60 Starlink v0.9 satellite prototypes. CEO Elon Musk and COO Gwynne Shotwell have strongly implied that the per-satellite cost is already well below $500,000, meaning that the absolute worst-case internal cost of a Falcon 9 launch is less than $30M.
If, for example, each Starlink satellite already costs as little as $250,000 to build, it’s possible that SpaceX can already launch a dedicated 60-satellite mission (including launch costs) at an internal cost of less than $30M ($15M for launch, $15M for 60 satellites). Even in the former scenario, a single Starlink launch might cost SpaceX has little as $60M in total.
In a best-case scenario for megaconstellation competitor OneWeb, the company purchased up to 21 Soyuz launches from Roscosmos for “more than $1 billion”, translating to roughly $50 million per launch (rocket costs only). Meanwhile, OneWeb’s satellite design is far more traditional and Soyuz offers significantly less performance than Falcon 9, resulting in a cap of 34 ~150 kg (330 lb) per launch. Finally, OneWeb hopes to build each satellite for about $1M, translating to a best-case per-launch cost of ~$85 million. OneWeb aims to launch once per month after its first 34-satellite mission, currently NET January 30th, 2020.
This is all a very roundabout way of illustrating the fact that once SpaceX becomes the world’s largest satellite operator, nothing short of repeated launch failures or the company’s outright collapse will prevent it from retaining that crown for the indefinite future. Once OneWeb has completed all 21 of its planned Soyuz launches, a milestone unlikely to come before mid-2021, it will have a constellation of ~700 satellites.
Even if SpaceX falters and manages a monthly Starlink launch cadence over the next 13 months, the constellation could surpass OneWeb’s Phase 1 plans as early as Q3 2020 – up to as early as June 2020 if SpaceX manages a biweekly cadence. By the time OneWeb’s constellation is complete, SpaceX could potentially have more than 2000 operational satellites in orbit – perhaps ~600 metric tons of spacecraft compared to OneWeb’s ~100 metric tons.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
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
