News
NASA may prematurely kill long-lived Mars rover with arbitrary wake-up deadline
In a decision with no obvious empirical explanation, JPL’s Opportunity Mars rover project manager John Callas was quoted in an August 30th press release saying that the NASA field center would be “forced to conclude” that the dust storm-stricken rover was effectively beyond saving if it fails to come back to life 45 days after 2018’s massive dust storm can be said to have officially ended.
Below the upbeat-sounding title of this press release is the scarier fact that after tau clears below 1.5, the rover has 45 days to wake up before NASA stops actively trying to revive it. Come on, #WakeUpOppy https://t.co/piCQLeaCEO
— Emily Lakdawalla (@elakdawalla) August 30, 2018
Over the course of that press release, Callas made a number of points that may technically hold at least a few grains of truth, but entirely fail to add up to any satisfactory explanation for the choices described therein. This is underscored in one critical and extended quote:
“If we do not hear back [from Opportunity] after 45 days, the team will be forced to conclude that the Sun-blocking dust and the Martian cold have conspired to cause some type of fault from which the rover will more than likely not recover. At that point, our active phase of reaching out to Opportunity will be at an end. However, in the unlikely chance that there is a large amount of dust sitting on the solar arrays that is blocking the Sun’s energy, we will continue passive listening efforts for several months.” – John Calwell, JPL
Scott Maxwell, a former JPL engineer who led drive planning for rovers Spirit and Opportunity, solidly explained the differences between active and passive recovery attempts:
Because it's a FAQ … "active listening" has two parts: (1) forcing Opportunity's radio, if she's listening, to a particular frequency (because it can drift), and (2) a command to talk to us. Pretty much guaranteed to work if she's awake with her radio on. https://t.co/iaHbHXFKqm
— 🇺🇦ScottMaxwell @marsroverdriver@deepspace.social (@marsroverdriver) August 31, 2018
The JPL press release offers exactly zero explanation for the “45-day” deadline, starting the moment that dust clears from Martian skies near Opportunity to a certain degree, likely to happen within the next few weeks. Nor does it explain why “active” recovery attempts would stop at that point, despite the fact that the PR happens to directly acknowledge the fact that the best time to attempt to actively restore contact Opportunity might be after Mars’ windy season is given a chance to blow accumulated dust off of the rover’s solar arrays.
In fact, while all points Callas/the press release makes may theoretically be valid, the experiences of the actual engineers that have been operating Opportunity and MER sister rover Spirit for nearly two decades suggest that his explanations are utterly shallow and fail even the most cursory comparison with real data.
Thanks largely to a number of comments collected by The Atlantic from past, present, and anonymous employees involved with Opportunity, it would seem that there is no truly empirical way to properly estimate the amount of dust that may or may not be on the rover’s solar arrays, no rational engineering-side explanation for the 45-day ultimatum, no clear excuse for how incredibly short that time-frame is, and essentially zero communication between whoever this decision originates from and the engineers tasked with operating and restoring communications with the forlorn, 15-year old rover.
Most tellingly, this exact impromptu dust-storm-triggered hibernation already occurred several times in the past, and even resulted in the demise of Opportunity’s sister rover Spirit in 2010. The Atlantic notes that when a dust storm forced that rover into hibernation in 2010, JPL mission engineers spent a full ten months actively attempting to resuscitate Spirit, followed by another five months of passive listening before the rescue effort was called off.
Given that Opportunity’s engineers appear to believe that there is every reason to expect that the rover can, has, and should survive 2018’s exceptional Martian dust storm, the only plausible explanation for the arbitrary countdown and potentially premature silencing of one of just two active rovers on Mars is purely political and financial. While it requires VERY little money to operate scientific spacecraft when compared with manufacturing and launch costs, the several millions of dollars needed to fund operations engineers and technicians (roughly $15 million per year for Opportunity) could technically be funneled elsewhere or the employees in question could be redirected to newer programs.
For example, the ~$200 million spent operating the rover from 2004 to 2018 could instead fund considerably less than 20% of the original cost of building and launching both Opportunity and Spirit. This is to say that that cutting operation of functioning spacecraft to save money can be quite fairly compared with throwing an iPhone in the trash because the charging cable ripped because $10 could instead be put towards buying a new phone months or years down the line.
Ultimately, all we can do is hope that Opportunity manages to successfully wake up over the course of the next two or three months. If the rover is unable to do so, chances are sadly high that it will be lost forever once active communications restoration efforts come to an end. With an extraordinarily productive 15 years of exploration nearly under its belt, Opportunity – originally designed with an expected lifespan of ~90 days – would leave behind a legacy that would fail to disappoint even the most ardent cynic. Still, if life may yet remain in the rover, every effort ought to be made to keep the intrepid craft alive.
For prompt updates, on-the-ground perspectives, and unique glimpses of SpaceX’s rocket recovery fleet check out our brand new LaunchPad and LandingZone newsletters!
News
Samsung’s Tesla AI5/AI6 chip factory to start key equipment tests in March: report
Samsung Electronics seems to be ramping its efforts to start operations at its Taylor, Texas semiconductor plant.
Samsung Electronics seems to be ramping its efforts to start operations at its Taylor, Texas semiconductor plant, which will produce Tesla’s next-generation AI5 chip.
Preparing for Tesla’s AI5/AI6 chips
As per a report by Sina Finance, Samsung Electronics is looking to begin trial operations of extreme ultraviolet (EUV) lithography equipment at its Taylor facility in March. These efforts are reportedly intended to support the full production of Tesla’s AI5 chips starting in the latter half of 2026.
The Taylor factory, Samsung’s first wafer fabrication plant in the United States, covers roughly 4.85 million square meters and is nearing completion. Media reports, citing contractors, have estimated that about 7,000 workers now work on the factory, about 1,000 of whom are reportedly working from the facility’s office building.
Samsung is reportedly preparing to apply for a temporary occupancy permit, which would allow production to begin before the plant is fully completed.
Tesla’s aggressive AI chip roadmap
Elon Musk recently stated that Tesla’s next-generation AI5 chip is nearly complete, while early development on its successor, AI6, is already underway. Musk shared the update in a post on X, which also happened to be a recruiting message for engineers.
As per Musk, Tesla is looking to iterate its in-house AI chips on an accelerated timeline, with future generations, including AI7, AI8, and AI9, targeting a roughly nine-month design cycle. He also stated that the rapid cadence could allow Tesla’s chips to become the highest-volume AI processors in the world.
Previous reports have indicated that Samsung Electronics would be manufacturing Tesla’s AI5 chip, alongside its rival, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC). The two suppliers are expected to produce different versions of Tesla’s AI5 chip, with TSMC using a 3nm process and Samsung targeting 2nm production.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk’s Boring Company studying potential Giga Nevada tunnel: report
The early-stage feasibility work was funded by a state-affiliated economic group as officials searched for alternatives to worsening traffic and accidents along Interstate 80.
Elon Musk’s tunneling startup, The Boring Company, has been studying a potential tunnel system connecting Reno to Tesla Gigafactory Nevada, as per documents obtained by Fortune. The early-stage feasibility work was funded by a state-affiliated economic group as officials searched for alternatives to worsening traffic and accidents along Interstate 80.
Potential Giga Nevada tunnel
Documents reviewed by Fortune showed that The Boring Company received $50,000 in October to produce conceptual designs and a feasibility report for a tunnel beneath a nine-mile stretch of highway leading to Gigafactory Nevada. The payment came from the Economic Development Authority of Western Nevada (EDAWN), a nonprofit that works with the state to attract and expand businesses.
The proposed tunnel was one of several transportation alternatives being explored to address rising congestion and accidents along Interstate 80, which serves the Tahoe-Reno Industrial Center. The massive industrial park houses major employers, including Tesla and Panasonic, both of which had been in contact with the Nevada Governor’s Office regarding potential transportation solutions.
Emails obtained through public records requests showed that Tesla and Panasonic have also supported a separate commuter rail study that would use existing freight rail alongside the Interstate. It remains unclear if The Boring Company’s feasibility report had been completed, and key details for the potential project, including tunnel length, cost, and if autonomous Teslas would be used, were not disclosed.
Relieving I-80 congestion
Traffic and accidents along I-80 have increased sharply as data centers and new businesses moved into the 107,000-acre industrial center. State transportation data showed that the number of vehicles traveling certain stretches of the highway during peak hours doubled between January and July 2025 alone. Roughly 22,000 employees commute daily to the industrial park, with nearly 8,000 working for Tesla and more than 4,000 for Panasonic at the Giga Nevada complex.
Bill Thomas, who runs the Regional Transportation Commission of Washoe County, shared his thoughts about safety concerns in the area. “At this point in time, there’s about (one accident) every other day,” he said. He also noted that he is supportive of any projects that could alleviate traffic and accidents on the Interstate.
“We’re not paying for it. I’m not involved in it. But I understand there are conversations exploring whether that could be done. If there’s a private solution that helps the problem and improves safety, as far as I’m concerned, more power to them,” Thomas stated.
News
Tesla might have built redundancies for Cybercab charging
When Tesla unveiled the Cybercab in 2024, the company noted that the autonomous two-seater would utilize wireless charging.
A newly spotted panel on Tesla’s Cybercab prototype may point to a practical backup for the vehicle’s wireless charging system as it nears mass production.
Tesla watchers have speculated that the panel could house a physical NACS port, which would ensure that the autonomous two-seater could operate reliably even before the company’s wireless charging infrastructure is deployed.
Cybercab possible physical charge port
The discussion was sparked by a post on X by Tesla watcher Owen Sparks, who highlighted a rather interesting panel on the Cybercab’s rear. The panel, which seemed to be present in the prototype units that have been spotted across the United States recently, seemed large enough to house a physical charge port.
When Tesla unveiled the Cybercab in 2024, the company noted that the autonomous two-seater would utilize wireless charging. Since then, however, Tesla has remained largely quiet about the system’s rollout timeline. With the Cybercab expected to enter production in a few months, equipping the vehicle with a physical NACS port would allow it to charge at Superchargers nationwide without relying exclusively on still-undeployed wireless chargers.
Such an approach would not rule out wireless charging long-term. Instead, it would give Tesla flexibility, allowing the Cybercab to operate immediately at scale while wireless charging solutions are rolled out later. For a vehicle designed to operate continuously and autonomously, redundancy in charging options would be a practical move.
Growing Cybercab sightings
Recent sightings of the Cybercab prototype in Chicago point to the same design philosophy. Images shared on social media showed the vehicle coated in road grime, while its rear camera area appeared noticeably cleaner, with visible traces of water on the trunk.
The observation suggests that the Cybercab is equipped with a rear camera washer. As noted by Model Y owner and industry watcher Sawyer Merritt, this is a feature Tesla owners have requested for years, particularly in snowy or wet climates where dirt and slush can obscure cameras and degrade the performance of systems like FSD.
While only the rear camera washer was clearly visible, the sighting raises the possibility that Tesla may equip additional exterior cameras with similar cleaning systems. For a vehicle that operates without a human driver, after all, maintaining camera visibility in all conditions is essential. Ultimately, the charge-port speculation and camera-washer sightings suggest Tesla is approaching the Cybercab with practicality in mind.
Samsung’s Tesla AI5/AI6 chip factory to start key equipment tests in March: report
Elon Musk’s Boring Company studying potential Giga Nevada tunnel: report
