News
SpaceX’s second Super Heavy booster might land in Mechazilla’s arms
CEO Elon Musk says that SpaceX could attempt to catch a Super Heavy booster out of mid-air with a tower-sized ‘Mechazilla’ robot as early as Starship’s second orbital launch attempt.
Speaking on Twitter just hours after SpaceX installed said Starship launch tower’s first arms, Musk has thankfully answered a question on the minds of many: how many prototype boosters must be expended? In a move that can be only described as unexpected, SpaceX revealed plans to fully expend its first orbital-class Starship and Super Heavy booster pair in May 2021 FCC filings, confirming (or strongly implying) that no true recovery attempts would be made.
Instead, in what could be described as a quasi-orbital debut, SpaceX intends to launch the first two-stage Starship to an altitude of around 200-300 km (TBD). Like many Falcon boosters, Super Heavy will separate a few minutes after liftoff, flip around, and boost back towards the South Texas coast, where it will attempt a soft landing 20 miles offshore in the Gulf of Mexico. Reading between the lines of Musk’s latest info, depending on the results of that ocean landing attempt, SpaceX might attempt to catch the second flightworthy Super Heavy booster on the very next launch.
Heading towards a similar fate, Starship will continue onwards and upwards like a Falcon upper stage. Based on its FCC application, SpaceX seems to have implied that Starship will stop just short of true orbit – traveling slow enough to passively reenter Earth’s atmosphere before completing a full trip around the planet. Of course, it’s possible that SpaceX simply left out plans for an intentional deorbit burn, but it does make sense that the company might try to lock in safeguards for such an ambitious inaugural test flight.
In other words, if Starship were to fail during the ~80 minutes it would spend coasting in space, its launch trajectory design would more or less passively prevent a Russian roulette scenario reminiscent of China’s recent spate of uncontrolled reentries. The feats facing Super Heavy are thankfully a fair bit simpler, though Starship booster recovery does pose its own hurdles.
In an apparent effort to reduce risk, SpaceX intends to fully expend the first flightworthy Super Heavy (potentially Booster 4) and all 29 of its Raptor engines. There will be no attempt at all to land the booster or its one-of-a-kind engines at land or on a sea-based platform – partly because Elon Musk appears to have endeavored to entirely prevent the installation – and, perhaps, the design and assembly – of legs. Instead, in one of the eccentric executive’s less intuitive gambles as of late, SpaceX will entirely dispense of more than half a decade of experience landing 90+ Falcon boosters on legs to attempt to catch Super Heavy boosters out of the air with house-sized arms tacked onto a 145m (~475 ft) tall tower.
No different than a hypothetical landing with legs, Super Heavy will still have to boost back to land, coast, and fire up several Raptor engines for a final landing burn – only on tiny handle-like hardpoints and giant moving arms instead of legs and a concrete pad. If catching boosters eventually proves reliable enough to be a worthwhile reinvention of the wheel, the only apparent benefit of the approach will be a slight reduction in Super Heavy’s dry mass.
According to Musk, though, SpaceX might not have to wait long to find out just how viable a recovery method ‘Mechazilla’ really is and will “hopefully” attempt to catch Super Heavy Booster 5 (B5) after Starship’s second orbital launch attempt. Presumably, that attempt is contingent upon FAA approval and on Booster 4 successfully simulating a smooth, accurate landing in the Gulf, as even a minor issue during a catch attempt could catastrophically damage pad hardware that would take months to repair or replace.
For now, it’s almost impossible to say when Starship S20 and Super Heavy B4 will be ready for their orbital launch debut, as that now lies almost solely in the hands of the FAA. In theory, the FAA could complete environmental reviews and grant SpaceX a launch license as few as two or so months from now. In practice, SpaceX could be forced to sit and wait for at least 6-12 more months. Regardless, SpaceX has already begun assembling and staging sections of Ship 21 and Booster 5, so the company could be ready for an extremely rapid turnaround (and Mechazilla’s first catch attempt) after Starship’s orbital launch debut – whenever that may come.
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
