News
NASA has good news after SpaceX Crew Dragon parachute test accident
NASA has good news after SpaceX suffered an accident that destroyed a Crew Dragon mockup before it could complete a parachute test, indicating that the anomaly could have minimal impact on the spacecraft’s Demo-2 astronaut launch debut.
According to NASA, SpaceX and the space agency are still working to launch astronauts on Crew Dragon as early as “mid-to-late May”. While two recent challenges – the loss of the spacecraft’s most important parachute testing mockup and an unrelated in-flight rocket engine failure – could both singlehandedly delay Demo-2 in certain scenarios, NASA continues to state that a May timeframe is still in the cards. This is an excellent sign that both issues – as previously speculated on Teslarati – are probably much less of a problem than they otherwise could be.
As of now, all Demo-2 hardware – including Falcon 9 booster B1058, a new Falcon upper stage, Crew Dragon capsule C206, and an expendable Dragon trunk – are all believed to be in Florida and technically ready for flight. Waiting for launch at and around Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Launch Complex 39A, the long straw for SpaceX’s inaugural astronaut launch is most likely the completion of formal paperwork and reviews, most of which must be done primarily by NASA employees. SpaceX’s latest technical challenges certainly toss some uncertainty into the mix and serve as a reminder that nothing can or should be taken for granted in human spaceflight but on the whole, there is reason for optimism.
“To date, SpaceX has completed 24 tests of its upgraded Mark 3 parachute design they are working to certify for use on the Crew Dragon spacecraft that will fly NASA astronauts to the International Space Station. The system was used during the SpaceX in-flight abort test in January.
On March 24, SpaceX lost a spacecraft-like device used to test the Crew Dragon Mark 3 parachute design. The test requires a helicopter to lift the device suspended underneath it to reach the needed test parameters. However, the pilot proactively dropped the device in an abundance of caution to protect the test crew as the test device became unstable underneath the helicopter. At the time of the release, the testing device was not armed, and a test of the parachute design was not performed.
Although losing a test device is never a desired outcome, NASA and SpaceX always will prioritize the safety of our teams over hardware. We are looking at the parachute testing plan now and all the data we already have to determine the next steps ahead of flying the upcoming Demo-2 flight test in the mid-to-late May timeframe.”
NASA.gov — March 26th, 2020
While the challenges SpaceX and NASA still have to surmount are thus significant, it’s safe to say that Crew Dragon’s track record more than earns it some optimism as the spacecraft nears the T-1 month mark for what will arguably SpaceX’s most significant launch ever.
Following a successful Pad Abort test in May 2015, the company spent several years working head down. In mid-2018, SpaceX’s first finished Crew Dragon spacecraft successfully passed through electromagnetic interference (EMI) and thermal vacuum (TVac) testing, arriving at the launch site for preflight processing by July. Unfortunately, for unknown reasons, it took more than half a year more for NASA to finally permit Crew Dragon to launch.
A month and a half after completing an integrated static fire test at Pad 39A, Falcon 9 and Crew Dragon lifted off for the first time ever on March 2nd, 2019. A flawless launch was followed by an equally flawless International Space Station (ISS) rendezvous and docking, completed autonomously and without issue on SpaceX’s first try. Crew Dragon capsule C201 spent five days at the station before autonomously departing, reentering Earth’s atmosphere, and gently splashing down in the Atlantic Ocean under four healthy parachutes.
Altogether, Crew Dragon’s orbital launch debut was such a flawless success that SpaceX’s own director of Crew Dragon mission management stated that he could barely believe how perfectly it went – likely expecting at least something to go slightly awry. That near-perfection certainly didn’t come easily for SpaceX. Boeing – NASA’s second Commercial Crew Program (CCP) partner – has had a far rougher go of things despite the fact that the company does technically have extensive experience building aircraft and rockets.
In November 2019, Boeing completed Starliner’s first fully integrated ‘flight’ test in the form of a pad abort. While the spacecraft was able to perform a soft landing, mishandling and bad quality control caused one of its three main parachutes to fail to deploy in an unintentional stress test. A little over a month later, a separate Starliner spacecraft performed its inaugural orbital launch on a ULA Atlas V rocket. From the moment Starliner separated from Atlas V, things began to go wrong. It would ultimately become clear that extremely shoddy software and an almost nonexistent integrated testing regime caused the spacecraft to waste most of its propellant and resulted in an extremely delayed orbital insertion.
While NASA and Boeing both managed to forget a second partial failure until media reporting shed light on it months later, it also turned out that another entirely separate instance of incomplete software may have nearly destroyed Starliner a matter of hours before it was scheduled to reenter Earth’s atmosphere. The spacecraft was ultimately prevented from even attempting a space station rendezvous, one of the major purposes of the test flight.
In simpler terms, Crew Dragon – even with the challenges it has and will soon face – is just shy of primed and ready for flight. As always, it’s better to be safe (and late) than sorry in human spaceflight, particularly the first such mission for SpaceX, but it’s looking increasingly likely that Crew Dragon will be on the launch pad and preparing to lift off with NASA astronauts just two or so months from now.
News
Tesla FSD (Supervised) fleet passes 8.4 billion cumulative miles
Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (Supervised) system has now surpassed 8.4 billion cumulative miles.
The figure appears on Tesla’s official safety page, which tracks performance data for FSD (Supervised) and other safety technologies.
Tesla has long emphasized that large-scale real-world data is central to improving its neural network-based approach to autonomy. Each mile driven with FSD (Supervised) engaged contributes additional edge cases and scenario training for the system.
The milestone also brings Tesla closer to a benchmark previously outlined by CEO Elon Musk. Musk has stated that roughly 10 billion miles of training data may be needed to achieve safe unsupervised self-driving at scale, citing the “long tail” of rare but complex driving situations that must be learned through experience.
The growth curve of FSD Supervised’s cumulative miles over the past five years has been notable.
As noted in data shared by Tesla watcher Sawyer Merritt, annual FSD (Supervised) miles have increased from roughly 6 million in 2021 to 80 million in 2022, 670 million in 2023, 2.25 billion in 2024, and 4.25 billion in 2025. In just the first 50 days of 2026, Tesla owners logged another 1 billion miles.
At the current pace, the fleet is trending towards hitting about 10 billion FSD Supervised miles this year. The increase has been driven by Tesla’s growing vehicle fleet, periodic free trials, and expanding Robotaxi operations, among others.
With the fleet now past 8.4 billion cumulative miles, Tesla’s supervised system is approaching that threshold, even as regulatory approval for fully unsupervised deployment remains subject to further validation and oversight.
Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (Supervised) system has now surpassed 8.4 billion cumulative miles.
The figure appears on Tesla’s official safety page, which tracks performance data for FSD (Supervised) and other safety technologies.
Tesla has long emphasized that large-scale real-world data is central to improving its neural network-based approach to autonomy. Each mile driven with FSD (Supervised) engaged contributes additional edge cases and scenario training for the system.
The milestone also brings Tesla closer to a benchmark previously outlined by CEO Elon Musk. Musk has stated that roughly 10 billion miles of training data may be needed to achieve safe unsupervised self-driving at scale, citing the “long tail” of rare but complex driving situations that must be learned through experience.
The growth curve of FSD Supervised’s cumulative miles over the past five years has been notable.
As noted in data shared by Tesla watcher Sawyer Merritt, annual FSD (Supervised) miles have increased from roughly 6 million in 2021 to 80 million in 2022, 670 million in 2023, 2.25 billion in 2024, and 4.25 billion in 2025. In just the first 50 days of 2026, Tesla owners logged another 1 billion miles.
At the current pace, the fleet is trending towards hitting about 10 billion FSD Supervised miles this year. The increase has been driven by Tesla’s growing vehicle fleet, periodic free trials, and expanding Robotaxi operations, among others.
With the fleet now past 8.4 billion cumulative miles, Tesla’s supervised system is approaching that threshold, even as regulatory approval for fully unsupervised deployment remains subject to further validation and oversight.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk fires back after Wikipedia co-founder claims neutrality and dubs Grokipedia “ridiculous”
Musk’s response to Wales’ comments, which were posted on social media platform X, was short and direct: “Famous last words.”
Elon Musk fired back at Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales after the longtime online encyclopedia leader dismissed xAI’s new AI-powered alternative, Grokipedia, as a “ridiculous” idea that is bound to fail.
Musk’s response to Wales’ comments, which were posted on social media platform X, was short and direct: “Famous last words.”
Wales made the comments while answering questions about Wikipedia’s neutrality. According to Wales, Wikipedia prides itself on neutrality.
“One of our core values at Wikipedia is neutrality. A neutral point of view is non-negotiable. It’s in the community, unquestioned… The idea that we’ve become somehow ‘Wokepidea’ is just not true,” Wales said.
When asked about potential competition from Grokipedia, Wales downplayed the situation. “There is no competition. I don’t know if anyone uses Grokipedia. I think it is a ridiculous idea that will never work,” Wales wrote.
After Grokipedia went live, Larry Sanger, also a co-founder of Wikipedia, wrote on X that his initial impression of the AI-powered Wikipedia alternative was “very OK.”
“My initial impression, looking at my own article and poking around here and there, is that Grokipedia is very OK. The jury’s still out as to whether it’s actually better than Wikipedia. But at this point I would have to say ‘maybe!’” Sanger stated.
Musk responded to Sanger’s assessment by saying it was “accurate.” In a separate post, he added that even in its V0.1 form, Grokipedia was already better than Wikipedia.
During a past appearance on the Tucker Carlson Show, Sanger argued that Wikipedia has drifted from its original vision, citing concerns about how its “Reliable sources/Perennial sources” framework categorizes publications by perceived credibility. As per Sanger, Wikipedia’s “Reliable sources/Perennial sources” list leans heavily left, with conservative publications getting effectively blacklisted in favor of their more liberal counterparts.
As of writing, Grokipedia has reportedly surpassed 80% of English Wikipedia’s article count.
News
Tesla Sweden appeals after grid company refuses to restore existing Supercharger due to union strike
The charging site was previously functioning before it was temporarily disconnected in April last year for electrical safety reasons.
Tesla Sweden is seeking regulatory intervention after a Swedish power grid company refused to reconnect an already operational Supercharger station in Åre due to ongoing union sympathy actions.
The charging site was previously functioning before it was temporarily disconnected in April last year for electrical safety reasons. A temporary construction power cabinet supplying the station had fallen over, described by Tesla as occurring “under unclear circumstances.” The power was then cut at the request of Tesla’s installation contractor to allow safe repair work.
While the safety issue was resolved, the station has not been brought back online. Stefan Sedin, CEO of Jämtkraft elnät, told Dagens Arbete (DA) that power will not be restored to the existing Supercharger station as long as the electric vehicle maker’s union issues are ongoing.
“One of our installers noticed that the construction power had been backed up and was on the ground. We asked Tesla to fix the system, and their installation company in turn asked us to cut the power so that they could do the work safely.
“When everything was restored, the question arose: ‘Wait a minute, can we reconnect the station to the electricity grid? Or what does the notice actually say?’ We consulted with our employer organization, who were clear that as long as sympathy measures are in place, we cannot reconnect this facility,” Sedin said.
The union’s sympathy actions, which began in March 2024, apply to work involving “planning, preparation, new connections, grid expansion, service, maintenance and repairs” of Tesla’s charging infrastructure in Sweden.
Tesla Sweden has argued that reconnecting an existing facility is not equivalent to establishing a new grid connection. In a filing to the Swedish Energy Market Inspectorate, the company stated that reconnecting the installation “is therefore not covered by the sympathy measures and cannot therefore constitute a reason for not reconnecting the facility to the electricity grid.”
Sedin, for his part, noted that Tesla’s issue with the Supercharger is quite unique. And while Jämtkraft elnät itself has no issue with Tesla, its actions are based on the unions’ sympathy measures against the electric vehicle maker.
“This is absolutely the first time that I have been involved in matters relating to union conflicts or sympathy measures. That is why we have relied entirely on the assessment of our employer organization. This is not something that we have made any decisions about ourselves at all.
“It is not that Jämtkraft elnät has a conflict with Tesla, but our actions are based on these sympathy measures. Should it turn out that we have made an incorrect assessment, we will correct ourselves. It is no more difficult than that for us,” the executive said.
Tesla FSD (Supervised) fleet passes 8.4 billion cumulative miles
Elon Musk fires back after Wikipedia co-founder claims neutrality and dubs Grokipedia “ridiculous”
