News
Tesla’s Gigafactory formula rose from a humble “tent” at the Fremont Factory
Back in 2018, Tesla was in a very different place. The company was struggling to release the Model 3, and it was behind on Elon Musk’s aggressive self-imposed vehicle production targets. The Fremont Factory’s assembly lines were not producing enough Model 3s, and it seemed like the company was poised to fail. Critics and shorts circled Tesla like sharks smelling blood in the water. But something unexpected happened, and things were never the same after.
Throwing convention out the window, Tesla built another Model 3 line inside a massive sprung structure at the Fremont Factory grounds, which CEO Elon Musk fondly called a “tent” online. The structure, dubbed as GA4, was mocked to the highest degree, used as a joke by critics, and dismissed outright by skeptics. However, what was almost unknown at the time was that Tesla might have actually stumbled into something special with its sprung structure-based line. By building a simple, straight, Model 3 line inside a “tent,” Tesla seems to have effectively created a solid Gigafactory formula.
No standard automotive solution could be built in time, so we created a new solution. It is working & has slightly higher quality than the more traditional general assembly line. Perhaps most surprising is that the total cost of production in the Sprung tent is lower.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 27, 2018
A Practical Concept
The sprung structure-based Model 3 line was the brainchild of Automotive President Jerome Guillen, widely known as Elon Musk’s “problem solver” back in the Model S’ early days. The “tent”-based line followed a relatively simple system, with vehicles being assembled progressively the further they moved into the tent. Even GA4’s loading bays were placed on the sides of the structure, allowing Tesla to take deliveries into the line efficiently. Musk was enthusiastic about the sprung structure on Twitter, noting not long after the “tent” was built that the vehicles produced in the site had “slightly higher quality” than cars made elsewhere.
These humble but creative beginnings appear to have become the heart of Tesla’s Gigafactory formula, one used in Giga Shanghai and Giga Berlin, and seemingly improved further with Gigafactory Texas. This could be seen in the design and processes that Tesla has adopted so far in its Shanghai and Berlin plants, both of which invoke the image of a scaled-up, refined, and optimized version of Fremont’s “tent.”
A Gigafactory Formula
Tesla critics typically overlook the fact that the Fremont Factory is a legacy car plant at its core. It’s an expansive facility, and it is impressive in its own right, but it’s not a site developed specifically to produce all-electric cars. Thus, for the Model S, Model X, and the Model 3’s early days, Tesla was essentially developing a system that makes EVs at scale using a facility designed initially to manufacture cars equipped with the internal combustion engine.
Of course, Tesla has made numerous adjustments to make the Fremont Factory into one of the most advanced electric vehicle plants in the market. However, it is difficult not to be impressed with Tesla’s quick production ramp and flexibility in Gigafactory Shanghai, arguably the first EV factory that the company built using its GA4 formula, with its simple production lines to its numerous loading bays at its side. This concept seems to have been carried over to Gigafactory Berlin, which is expected to ramp its operations at a rate that rivals even that of Giga Shanghai.
A Matter of Scale
Ultimately, it appears that GA4 was Tesla’s “eureka” moment of sorts, at least for its electric vehicle factories. By scaling up and refining the sprung structure-based concept, Tesla was able to create monster factories like Giga Shanghai, and later this year, Gigafactory Berlin as well. However, this is not all as Tesla seems to be adopting an updated design for Gigafactory Texas, with its three main buildings built parallel with each other. Little is known about the reasons behind Giga Texas’ design, but there’s little doubt that the expansive facility will be very impressive when completed nonetheless.
Prior to the Model 3’s “production hell,” Elon Musk spoke about Tesla’s “Alien Dreadnought” factories, which are supposed to be so automated and advanced that they would resemble alien facilities featured in sci-fi fiction. Tesla seems to have shelved this idea following the Model 3’s challenges in its initial production ramp. With an established Gigafactory formula of sorts in its repertoire, however, and coupled with innovations such as the Model Y’s megacasts, Elon Musk’s dreadnoughts may not be too far into the future at all.
Don’t hesitate to contact us for news tips. Just send a message to tips@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.
SpaceX confirmed today that it has officially signed its third massive compute deal, providing compute at its Colossus data center in Southaven, Tennessee.
Reflection AI will gain immediate access to NVIDIA GB300 chips at SpaceX’s Colossus 2 data center. In return, Reflection will pay SpaceX $150 million per month starting on July 1, with total payments reaching approximately $6.3 billion if the contract runs through its duration, which is until 2029. Either party can terminate the agreement with 90 days’ notice after the initial three-month period.
CNBC first reported the deal.
🚨 SpaceXAI has agreed to a new compute deal with Reflection AI.
Reflection gets access to NIVIDIA GB300s, and will pay $150M per month to SpaceXAI for the compute. pic.twitter.com/bNPare8U5u
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 22, 2026
This latest partnership highlights SpaceX’s strategy of commercializing its massive Colossus supercomputing infrastructure, originally developed to power Elon Musk’s Grok AI models. The company has rapidly expanded its customer base in the AI sector following its February 2026 merger with xAI, a transaction that valued the combined entity at $1.25 trillion.
SpaceX has previously signed significant compute deals with other major players.
It granted Anthropic exclusive access to the full capacity of its Colossus 1 data center, which exceeds 300 megawatts and includes over 220,000 NVIDIA GPUs. Details from SpaceX’s IPO filings indicate Anthropic will pay $1.25 billion per month through May 2029, potentially generating around $45 billion over the term of the deal.
Additionally, Google agreed to pay SpaceX $920 million per month for compute capacity from October 2026 through June 2029. This 32-month period will provide Google access to roughly 110,000 NVIDIA GPUs, along with supporting processors and memory. Capacity ramps up through September at a reduced fee, with termination options after the first year.
SpaceXA also established arrangements for computing power with Cursor, an AI coding startup. SpaceX acquired them in a $60 billion all-stock deal.
These arrangements position SpaceX’s collective position as an AI infrastructure powerhouse with high-margin revenue potential. The Google deal alone could generate nearly $29.5 billion over its term, while the Reflection contract adds another $6.3 billion.
Combined with the Anthropic arrangement, SpaceX stands to realize tens of billions in revenue from compute leasing in the coming years, which diversifies beyond SpaceX’s traditional rocket launches and Starlink operation.
The deals underscore growing demand for advanced AI training and inference capacity amid chip shortages and surging model development needs. Reflection, valued at $25 billion and focused on “American open intelligence” with government and national security ties, cited recent restrictions on closed models as validation for open-source approaches.
For SpaceX, the partnerships transform capital-intensive data centers into flexible revenue sources while supporting its broader AI ambitions after the company has gone public.
It is safe to say SpaceX won’t be going for electric rockets anytime soon.
In a characteristically blunt reply on X, SpaceX frontman Elon Musk stated, “Unfortunately, electric rockets are impossible,” following reports that MSCI had assigned SpaceX its lowest possible ESG rating of CCC.
The assessment, issued just this past week, coinciding closely with SpaceX’s public market debut, placed the company on par with nations like Russia in sustainability scoring and cited significant risks in environmental, social, and governance areas.
MSCI flagged SpaceX’s exposure to rocket emissions and other operational impacts, alongside governance concerns such as concentrated control by Musk and limited shareholder protections. Musk’s terse comment directly addressed the environmental pillar, underscoring a core physical constraint that ESG frameworks often overlook when evaluating high-thrust industries.
Unfortunately, electric rockets are impossible
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 21, 2026
Electric propulsion systems do exist and are widely used in space. Ion thrusters and Hall-effect thrusters accelerate ionized propellant, typically xenon or krypton, using electric fields, achieving very high specific impulse, often exceeding 3,000 seconds compared to roughly 300–450 seconds for chemical rockets.
This efficiency makes them ideal for satellite station-keeping, orbit raising, and deep-space missions where low thrust over long durations is sufficient. SpaceX’s own Starlink satellites employ electric propulsion for these purposes.
However, launching from Earth’s surface demands something entirely different: enormous thrust delivered rapidly to overcome gravity and atmospheric drag. A typical orbital-class booster must generate thrust far exceeding its weight, often in the millions of Newtons within seconds.
Chemical rockets achieve this through exothermic combustion of dense propellants, producing high-mass-flow, high-velocity exhaust. Electric systems, by contrast, expel very small amounts of mass at extremely high speeds. Generating equivalent thrust would require impractical onboard power levels, massive energy storage or generation systems, and prohibitive added mass, rendering the approach infeasible with current or near-term technology.
Musk has previously expressed a similar sentiment, noting a desire for electric orbital rockets while acknowledging the inescapable requirements of Newton’s third law and energy delivery. The distinction is clear: electric propulsion excels once a vehicle is already in space; it cannot replace the high-thrust chemical phase required to reach orbit from the ground.
The episode illustrates broader critiques of ESG ratings. Proponents argue they incentivize better risk management and long-term sustainability. Detractors, including Musk—who has previously called ESG a “scam”—contend that such metrics can penalize essential activities when no practical alternative exists, potentially discouraging innovation in sectors like space access.
Elon Musk dubs the S&P 500 ESG as “outrageous scam” after Tesla gets booted from index
SpaceX has sought to mitigate launch-related impacts through reusability: Falcon 9 boosters have flown more than 30 times in some cases, dramatically lowering the manufacturing and emissions burden per kilogram delivered to orbit. Starship’s design further emphasizes rapid reusability and methane propellant, which can theoretically be produced via sustainable pathways.
Ultimately, Musk’s remark serves as a reminder that certain engineering realities persist regardless of scoring systems. As humanity expands its presence in space for communications, science, and exploration, balancing genuine environmental progress with technological necessity remains a central challenge.
ESG frameworks may evolve, but the fundamental limits of electric launch propulsion are unlikely to change soon.
Tesla just trademarked ‘MEGAPOD’ with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), its latest move in what seems to be a hint that the company is incredibly focused on its AI efforts and storage needs as compute increases.
The application carries serial number 99893717 and lists the applicant as Tesla, Inc., located at 1 Tesla Road, Austin, Texas 78725.
The filing remains in ‘live pending’ status, and it is a new application waiting for assignment to an examining attorney. It has not yet been published or registered.
Tesla just trademarked MEGAPOD
Summary:
“Modular data center hardware systems for artificial intelligence computing, comprised of computer servers, computer hardware for artificial intelligence processing, computer networking hardware, electrical power distribution units, and… pic.twitter.com/3l85DsKadl— Robin (@xdNiBoR) June 19, 2026
According to the official goods and services description in the application, Tesla describes ‘MEGAPOD’ as:
“Modular data center hardware systems for artificial intelligence computing, comprised of computer servers, computer hardware for artificial intelligence processing, computer networking hardware, electrical power distribution units, and cooling systems, sold as a unit; self-contained modular computing hardware systems for artificial intelligence workloads; integrated computer hardware platforms for artificial intelligence computing, namely, enclosures containing computer hardware, power distribution hardware, and cooling hardware, sold as a unit; downloadable software for monitoring, managing, optimizing, and regulating modular artificial intelligence computing hardware systems.”
This description specifies complete, self-contained modular units that integrate servers and specialized AI processing hardware with networking components, power distribution, and cooling systems. It also includes associated downloadable software for oversight and optimization of these systems. The language emphasizes hardware sold “as a unit” and enclosures that combine the necessary elements for AI computing workloads.
Tesla has an established history of developing and commercializing modular hardware systems. Its Megapack product line, for example, consists of utility-scale battery energy storage systems designed as containerized units for grid applications. The MEGAPOD filing follows a similar pattern of protecting a name for modular, integrated hardware platforms, this time focused on artificial intelligence computing infrastructure.
This could be an early move, especially as Tesla did not have trademark rights to the word ‘Cybercab,’ the name of its self-driving, ride-hailing-focused vehicle.
Trademark applications of this type allow companies to secure priority rights to a name for defined categories of goods and services. The USPTO examines applications for compliance with legal requirements, including distinctiveness and absence of conflicts with prior marks. If the application proceeds successfully through examination, publication, and any opposition period, it could result in a federal trademark registration providing nationwide protection. This is what Tesla’s obvious intention is with ‘MEGAPOD.’
Public reports and analysis suggest MEGAPOD could represent modular, container-style AI computing pods designed for easy deployment. These would bundle servers, AI accelerators, power systems, and cooling into self-contained units suitable for distributed AI workloads. This approach aligns with Tesla’s announced AI compute strategy.
In March 2026, Elon Musk outlined plans for “Digital Optimus” (also referred to as Macrohard), a joint Tesla-xAI project for AI agents capable of handling complex digital tasks. The plans include running these agents on Tesla’s AI4 hardware in parked vehicles as well as dedicated compute units installed at Supercharger stations, which collectively offer substantial unused electrical capacity.
What is Digital Optimus? The new Tesla and xAI project explained
A modular hardware platform like the one described in the ‘MEGAPOD’ filing would support scalable, rapid deployment of such distributed compute resources. It could complement Tesla’s other AI infrastructure efforts, including the Dojo supercomputer used for training models and the development of AI systems for autonomous driving and robotics, by enabling edge or regional AI inference without reliance on traditional centralized data centers.
SpaceX confirms third massive compute deal at Colossus data center
Elon Musk responds to SpaceX’s ESG rating and says its rockets won’t go electric
