News
SpaceX files Starship flight debut paperwork, preps for launch pad upgrades
On September 9th, the first signs of SpaceX planning for Starship Mk1’s South Texas launch debut appeared in the form of FCC applications, requesting permission to communicate with the rocket prototype during its first flight.
Simultaneously, word broke on September 5th – via a Business Insider report – that SpaceX is effectively set to receive FAA permission to upgrade its South Texas launch facilities for Starship. All things considered, it appears that most – if not all – the stars have begun to align for SpaceX’s inaugural Starship launch, said by CEO Elon Musk to be scheduled for no earlier than October 2019.
The application confirms several details about Starship Mk1’s debut, revealing that SpaceX will kick off the test campaign with a running jump from Starhopper’s 150m (500 ft) flight-test hand-off. The company is targeting an altitude of ~20 km (12.5 mi) – more than two magnitudes higher than its predecessor’s peak – and plans to land the spacecraft just a hundred or so feet from its launch site, on the same landing pad used by Starhopper.
SpaceX teams continue to work around the clock to ready Starship Mk1 for its ambitious flight debut. A new ring segment was stacked on top of the vehicle’s tank section several days ago, while locals also spotted the delivery of one or two new legs/fins, built out of riveted steel. SpaceX’s Boca Chica team continues to struggle to attach Starship’s tip to the rest of its curved nose section, having recently separated the segments for the first time in months.
Preliminary welding of Starship Mk1’s upper (and final) tank dome appears to be complete and technicians are working to integrate the spacecraft’s internal hardware before it can be installed. Meanwhile, a range of new concrete pads have been set and are being outfitted with additional production hardware, likely paving the way for simultaneously Starship-Starship or Starship-Super Heavy builds in the near future.
Documents acquired and published on September 5th by Business Insider reporter Dave Mosher touched on the assembly facility’s expansion and provided an excellent overview of SpaceX’s planned upgrades to its Starship launch pad. Retasked from original plans (and approvals) for an additional Falcon 9/Falcon Heavy launch site, the documents confirmed that the FAA has reevaluated its 2014 Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and is effectively ready to re-permit SpaceX’s Boca Chica facilities in light of its new purpose.
About as classically SpaceX as it gets, the company has already dramatically altered plans and timelines since the FAA even began to reevaluate its launch pad EIS. Discussed as Phases 1-3, SpaceX – barely two months after the FAA’s updated EIS statement – appears to have already completed Phases 1 and 2 (wet dress rehearsals, static fires, and small hops) and doesn’t have public plans for “medium hops” of “30 cm…up to 3 km”. The FAA statement – signed in May 2019 – says that the agency did not have the information necessary to permit Phase 3, involving “engine ignition and thrust to lift the Starship to 100 km, flip the Starship at high altitude, and conduct a reentry and landing.“
This article’s feature photo shows SpaceX’s late-2018/early-2019 imagining of launch site upgrades reportedly needed to support Phase 2 testing. Although extremely similar to what SpaceX has already built in South Texas, some significant changes are definitely present, and it looks like SpaceX has a busy 4-8 weeks of work ahead to complete necessary modifications, including expanded propellant storage, two large walls, and possible underground routing of critical infrastructure.
Ultimately, significant work remains for SpaceX to receive both FAA’s EIS go-ahead and experimental launch permits for Starship Mk1’s first flight. Based on the ~3 weeks it took the FAA to simply extend Starhopper’s existing 25m hop permit to 200m (eventually cut to 150m), it could be quite the uphill battle to jump to a 20 km flight test. For the time being, SpaceX hopes to conduct Starship’s 20-km flight debut as early as October 13th, in line with Musk’s ambitious “October” target.
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
