News
Tesla safety tech takes giant step with FCC approval for wave sensor
Tesla’s request for the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to approve a millimeter-wave sensor for child protection and anti-theft measures has been granted. Along with five other companies, Tesla received “a grant of waivers” on April 14, 2021, that would allow the installation of radar sensors in the 57-64 GHz frequency band in passenger motor vehicles. The system is now likely to contribute to the imminent release of a driver monitoring system, which would keep drivers attentive during the use of the company’s Full Self-Driving suite.
The document also granted Vayyar Imaging Ltd., Valeo North America, Infineon Technologies America Corp, IEE Sensing Inc., and Brose North America to use millimeter-wave sensors. Tesla and IEE were approved for 60-64 GHz, while the other companies can utilize 57-64 GHz.
Millimeter-Wave Sensor
In August 2020, Teslarati reported that Tesla had requested the FCC to approve a short-range motion sensor that would save kids from being left in hot cars. The sensor would also boost the company’s theft-prevention system as it would be active “approximately 6 feet” outside of the vehicle “to provide vehicle security benefits such as detecting a broken window or a vehicle intrusion.” Tesla originally filed for a request for a waiver on July 31, 2020.
After a few months of research and deliberation, the FCC is waiving requirements that would prohibit the approval of these systems. The government agency says that “We find that grant of these waivers…will bring immediate relief to the industry and the public in this area. Specifically, our action will bring forth substantial public benefits by improving vehicular safety for children and providing opportunities for additional vehicular automation and theft prevention applications without increasing the potential for harmful interference to authorized users in the band.”
The Sensor’s use for Driver Monitoring for Full Self-Driving
New FCC documents obtained by Teslarati indicate that Tesla’s device “will use 4 transmit and 3 receive antennas driven by a highly configurable radar front-end unit and in-vehicle radar modulation will consist of consecutive frames, including an acquisition sequence comprised by a repetition of frequency chirps or stepped chirps, a listening period, then a period for signal processing.” However, there may be more uses for the sensor, which aligns with the company’s current plans to monitor driver behavior and attentiveness during the use of Autopilot or Full Self-Driving.
The documents state:
“Tesla identifies some potential use cases—child detection, cabin intrusion, and exterior detection—for which sensing would occur only while the vehicle is stationary; and other use cases—occupant detection and classification—for which the device would sense both while the vehicle is stationary and while in motion; and one use case—driver’s vital signs monitoring—for which the device would sense only while the vehicle is in motion.”
The device, along with the vehicle’s interior cabin camera, will monitor facial features and vital signs to ensure that a driver is paying attention. Tesla recently revoked access to its FSD Beta program to some owners as they did not remain sufficiently attentive while utilizing the FSD Suite.
Tesla officially expands FSD Beta test field while revoking access to the irresponsible
In early April, Tesla hacker green released footage of the Driver Monitoring system, showing how the interior cabin camera would constantly look at the driver’s facial features. This would ensure that a driver using the FSD or Autopilot systems is still paying attention to the road. Because Tesla’s FSD isn’t operating with Level 5 autonomy, it still requires the driver to pay attention to the road and the vehicle’s surroundings.
By popular demand, night footage with Tesla DMS detections.
It’s not perfect but workable with street lights and whatnot (as suspected)
Full 23.5 minutes footage on youtube: https://t.co/AZSpN3ZoFi
No idea why Dark/blinded top out at 50% only.
reworked display.@rice_fry pic.twitter.com/FiF6i33XGZ— green (@greentheonly) April 8, 2021
Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety believe that the inclusion of the sensor could be highly advantageous for autonomous vehicles. “The ability of a vehicle to detect and classify all occupants will likely be critical as autonomous vehicles (AVs) are deployed onto our roads in the future… because…AVs will need to know the number of occupants and whether they are properly restrained before beginning to move,” safety advocates said.
Child Safety and Anti-Theft Devices
The device was originally going to be used to detect children left in a hot car. The system “provides depth perception and can ‘see’ through soft materials, such as a blanket covering a child in a child restraint,” according to Tesla’s original filing. The device “can differentiate between a child and an object left on the seat, reducing the likelihood of false alarms,” Tesla said. It can also detect “micromovements like breathing patterns and heart rates, neither of which can be captured by cameras or in-seat sensors alone.” Google was granted the use of a device “under the same technical parameters” by the FCC in 2018.
The device would also be able to detect intrusions of theft attempts, which could be coupled with the highly effective Tesla Sentry Mode. Sentry Mode records events that occur near the vehicle and has helped police crack several vandalism and robbery cases in the past.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration says that 105 kids were killed in 2018 and 2019 because of being left in a hot car. The death occurred 54% of the time because someone forgot their child was in the car. The approval of the millimeter-wave sensor could decrease that number significantly if it receives widespread approval after Tesla’s usage.
The use of the sensor is immediately effective. “Accordingly, pursuant to authority in Sections 0.31, 0.241, and 1.3 of the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR §§ 0.21, 0.241, and 1.3, and Sections 4(i), 302, 303(e), and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 154(i), 302, 303(e), and 303(r), IT IS ORDERED that the Request for Waiver filed by Tesla Inc. IS GRANTED, consistent with the terms of this Order. This action is effective upon release of this Order.”
The FCC’s grant documentation is available below.
DA-21-407A1 (1) by Joey Klender on Scribd
Investor's Corner
New drone video shows Tesla’s Optimus Factory reaching a turning point
New drone footage shows Tesla’s dedicated Optimus factory steel frame nearing completion at Giga Texas.
Tesla’s dedicated Optimus factory at Gigafactory Texas is closing in on a finished steel frame, according to drone footage posted Thursday afternoon by longtime site observer Joe Tegtmeyer. In the video, Tegtmeyer said structural steel assembly is now about five column grids away from reaching the building’s north perimeter beam, putting the primary skeleton in its final stretch roughly six months after Tesla broke ground on the North Campus site in late March.
The Giga Texas Optimus Factory latest update … construction keeps moving fast!
Steel assembly is now only about 5 column grids from the north perimeter beam. Concrete is going in on the three upper floors, rebar is still being laid for more pours, and footing / grade-beam work… pic.twitter.com/qvFPvwnYzW
— Joe Tegtmeyer 🚀 🤠🛸😎 (@JoeTegtmeyer) September 17, 2026
Tegtmeyer’s footage shows concrete already going in on three upper floors while crews continue laying rebar and pouring grade beam footings at ground level. That kind of parallel work, steel rising at one end of the site while concrete sets at the other, is a scheduling approach Tesla used at the original Giga Texas building and appears to be repeating here to save time before the plant’s targeted 2027 production start.
Teslarati has tracked the building’s progress since Tesla confirmed construction was officially underway in May, when the first steel structure went up on what was then bare, reclaimed land. The facility is part of a more than 5.2 million square foot expansion of Giga Texas’s North Campus that Tesla has said will eventually run nearly the length of the existing vehicle factory, over 4,000 feet, while sitting somewhat narrower. Musk has pegged the long term output target at 10 million Optimus units a year once the line is running at full capacity, a volume that would dwarf the one million unit pilot line Tesla is standing up separately at its Fremont, California factory.
Tesla Giga Texas to feature massive Optimus V4 production line
The Texas facility sits alongside another major buildout on the same campus. Terafab, the joint Tesla and SpaceX chip fabrication plant that will eventually supply the silicon running Optimus units in the field. Housing robot assembly and chip production on the same grounds is a deliberate supply chain decision, cutting down on the shipping and lead time that would otherwise sit between the two.
Tesla has not given an updated timeline beyond its previously stated goal of bringing high volume Optimus production online at the site in the summer of 2027. Fremont’s smaller pilot line began mass producing the current Gen 3 robot in January, with that plant expected to build tens of thousands of units this year primarily to generate the real world data Tesla needs to refine the robot’s software before Giga Texas ramps up. Six months of visible construction progress, tracked almost entirely through Tegtmeyer’s recurring drone flights, gives the clearest outside look yet at how seriously Tesla is treating that 2027 deadline.
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.
New drone video shows Tesla’s Optimus Factory reaching a turning point
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
