For the fourth time in nine months, SpaceX has docked a Dragon spacecraft to the International Space Station with a second Dragon already present at the crewed orbital laboratory.
Launched Saturday on a Falcon 9 rocket after a one-day weather delay, SpaceX’s first upgraded Cargo Dragon 2 spacecraft gradually boosted and tweaked its orbit over the course of ~30 hours, looping around the Earth 20+ times before docking with the ISS more than half an hour ahead of schedule. Dragon’s Monday, August 30th arrival marked cargo capsule C208’s second space station docking in nine months, smashing SpaceX and the world’s turnaround record for a reusable orbital space capsule – of which Dragons are the only still flying.
SpaceX’s first twice-flown Crew Dragon was there to greet the first twice-flown Cargo Dragon 2 spacecraft when it docked, having spent the last four months in orbit in support of NASA’s second operational commercial crew mission (Crew-2). A similar instance of a pair Dragons meeting in space is likely to occur at least two more times before the end of 2021.
The first two-Dragons-one-ISS instance occurred just nine months ago when the very same Cargo Dragon 2 spacecraft (capsule C208) rendezvoused and docked with the ISS with SpaceX’s Crew-1 Crew Dragon already attached. At the time, in a number of press conferences and public statements centered around the launch of Crew-1 and CRS-21, SpaceX repeatedly hinted at just how prolific a year 2021 would be for Dragon and it’s hard to argue that the company was exaggerating.
Indeed, exactly as SpaceX foretold, Dragon spacecraft have maintained a continuous presence in orbit and repeatedly operated side by side at the ISS since Crew-1’s November 2021 launch. For the majority of NASA’s Commercial Crew Program development, that degree of continuous, single-provider operations was never meant to happen. SpaceX’s upgraded Cargo Dragon, for example, is one of two independent Commercial Resupply Services (CRS) spacecraft that regularly resupply the space station, ensuring redundancy in the event that one spacecraft or rocket runs into major issues. A third CRS vehicle – Sierra Nevada’s Dream Chaser spaceplane – will also begin cargo deliveries sometime next year.
NASA’s Commercial Crew Program was structured in the same way, with Boeing and SpaceX serving as two redundant crew transport providers. Of course, things didn’t go exactly according to plan and Boeing – despite receiving 60% (~$2B) more funding than SpaceX – has suffered numerous catastrophic issues in recent years, nearly dooming its Starliner spacecraft’s first uncrewed launch in December 2019 and ultimately delaying the company by two or more years.
After further issues delayed Starliner’s uncrewed do-over test flight (OFT-2) from August to late 2021 or early 2022, it’s entirely possible that SpaceX will operate as NASA’s sole crew transport solution for more than 18 months before Boeing flies a single astronaut. In other words, it’s likely that SpaceX will need to maintain the extraordinary cadence of Dragon launches demonstrated in 2021 well into 2022, and possibly even 2023. Since November 2020, SpaceX has launched three Cargo Dragon 2 resupply missions and eight astronauts on two Crew Dragons.
Another two NASA Dragon missions – Crew-3 and CRS-24 – are scheduled to launch in October and December 2021 and SpaceX’s first fully private Inspiration4 Crew Dragon launch could happen as early as September 15th. So long as Boeing’s Starliner is unable to fulfill its crew transport role, all future SpaceX Crew and Cargo missions for NASA – including Crew-3 and CRS-24 – will continue to see one Dragon meet another at the ISS. All told, barring possible delays to CRS-24, SpaceX is on track to launch eight Dragons – four Crew and four Cargo; 16 astronauts and 11 tons of space station supplies – in 13 months.
If Crew Dragon and Cargo Dragon 2 are considered to be two variants of the same Dragon 2 spacecraft, the only other instance in history where another orbital spacecraft came close to eight successful orbital launches in ~13 months was NASA’s Gemini Program, which completed eight crewed test flights in ~14 months in 1965 and 1966.
NASA’s Apollo spacecraft also completed six successful flights (5 crewed, 1 uncrewed) in 13 months in 1968 and 1969. Russian Soyuz vehicles – the most prolific crewed spacecraft in history – have also successfully flown 8 times in 13 months and 9 times in 14 months in the 1970s. Put simply, SpaceX’s Dragon program is now singlehandedly executing at or above the level of the two most prolific national space programs in history at funding peaks that haven’t been touched since and for a fraction of the cost.
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
