News
SpaceX CEO Elon Musk's latest Starship photos reveal surprise landing legs [confirmed]
Update: In a Twitter response to Teslarati’s report, Musk confirmed that SpaceX has already installed six telescoping landing legs on the Starship SN3 prototype.
CEO Elon Musk published new photos of a Starship prototype shortly after it was moved to SpaceX’s South Texas launch pad, revealing the surprise inclusion of already-installed landing legs and hinting at the growing maturity of the rocket’s design.
Published on March 30th and likely taken late on March 29th, Musk’s latest Starship photos offer the best look yet at the massive vehicle’s engine section, where Raptor engines may soon be installed for historic static fire and hop test attempts. First captured in photos taken by local photographer and resident Mary (bocachicagal) on March 28th, speculation about what appeared to be six odd legs immediately kicked off on spaceflight forums. Due to limited publicly-available perspectives and the appendages’ locations inside Starship’s cavernous engine section, there was some limited ambiguity as to whether the steel pieces were truly legs or something closer to general structural support.
Thankfully, Musk’s new photos all but confirmed the former theory, revealing a sextet of hinged legs with a curious stubby appearance and what appears to be a rather simple and elegant design. Most importantly, the unexpected presence of landing legs – while likely cheap to implement – suggests that SpaceX is growing increasingly confident in each subsequent Starship prototype, an encouraging sign for imminent static fire and hop test plans.
In fact, SpaceX filed a Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on March 30th — the biggest confirmation yet that the company is seriously working to prepare Starship SN3 for a Raptor engine static fire test as early as April 1st. Backup dates on the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th are included, leaving a decent amount of breathing room for SpaceX’s Texas team to (hopefully) successfully complete the rocket’s proof test in the next few days.
Possibly preceded by a water pressure test to check for leaks and verify general structural integrity, Starship SN3’s proof test will see the rocket’s methane and oxygen tanks fully filled with cryogenic liquid nitrogen. The tank pressure would then be increased to around 6-8 bar (90-115 psi) to ensure that Starship can handle the thermal and pressure stresses it will experience during launches. Given SpaceX’s recent history, including a partially unintentional Starship Mk1 tank failure in November 2019, the intentional destruction of two Starship test tanks in January 2020, and Starship SN1’s unintentional February 2020 failure, success is still far from guaranteed for Starship SN3.
Nevertheless, SpaceX seems more confident in Starship SN3 than it was in Starships Mk1 and SN1 – the only other full-scale prototypes to have reached the testing phase. It’s possible that including leg prototypes were cheap and easy enough to be worth installing regardless of SpaceX’s broader confidence in Starship SN3 as a whole. However, it would still be a clear waste of time and resources to install all six landing legs if the internal consensus was to expect a failure in the early phases of SN3 testing.
SpaceX, in other words, seems to believe that Starship SN3 will pass its imminent tank proof test without any major issues. Additionally, the company must be confident in the outcome of the Starship SN3 Raptor static fire(s) expected to immediately follow any successful proof test. SpaceX has successfully demonstrated Raptor several times on flight hardware with the help of the Starhopper development vehicle, but a full-scale Starship is arguably a different animal.
Regardless, it’s now clearer than ever that SpaceX is confident enough to put a few eggs in the Starship SN3 basket. With landing legs installed, the massive rocket prototype could be ready for a Starhopper-style 150m (500 ft) hop test just a week or so from now. For now, though, Starship SN3 needs to pass a tank proof test, perform a wet dress rehearsal (WDR) with real propellant, and complete one or several Raptor static fires before a flight test will be in its cards. Stay tuned!
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
