News
SpaceX aces 60th orbital launch of 2022
SpaceX has completed its 60th orbital launch of 2022, marking the first time the company has fully hit a public cadence target set by one of its executives.
By every possible measure, 2022 has been a groundbreaking year for SpaceX even when considering the vast list of achievements it’s racked up over the last half-decade. It owns and operates the largest satellite constellation in history by an order of magnitude. Its Starlink satellite internet service has secured more than a million subscribers less than two years after entering beta. It operates the only routinely reusable orbital-class rockets and orbital spacecraft currently in service. Its Falcon 9 workhorse has launched more in one year than any other single rocket in history. It’s regularly launching at a pace that hasn’t been sustained by any one country – let alone a single company – in 40 years. It’s managing that near-historic cadence while simultaneously recovering and reusing boosters and fairings that represent some 70% of the value of almost every rocket it launches.
And now, SpaceX can also proudly show that it was able to hit a launch cadence target that seemed impossibly ambitious when CEO Elon Musk first shared it nine months ago.
The update that's rolling out to the fleet makes full use of the front and rear steering travel to minimize turning circle. In this case a reduction of 1.6 feet just over the air— Wes (@wmorrill3) April 16, 2024
Exactly nine months later, SpaceX has just completed its 60th launch of 2022. 69 days after its last orbital-class launch, Falcon 9 booster lifted off for the 11th time with a somewhat mysterious batch of 54 Starlink satellites. A bit less than nine minutes after liftoff, B1062 touched down 660 kilometers (410 mi) downrange on SpaceX drone ship A Shortfall Of Gravitas (ASOG). Seconds prior, Falcon 9’s expendable upper stage reached orbit, shut down its lone Merlin Vacuum engine, and began slowly spinning itself end over end.
Nineteen minutes after leaving the ground, the stack of 54 Starlink satellites was released all at once, slowly spreading out like a splayed deck of cards. Over the coming hours, days, and weeks, those satellites will naturally spread out, deploy solar arrays, stabilize their attitudes, test their payloads, and begin climbing toward an operational orbit somewhere between 480 and 580 kilometers (300-360 mi) above Earth’s surface.
As previously discussed, SpaceX’s so-called “Starlink 5-1” mission raises a number of questions that the company’s launch webcast and communications unfortunately failed to answer. First and foremost, the “5-1” name is nonsensical. The only information SpaceX did disclose about the mission is that it’s the “first [launch] of Starlink’s upgraded network…under [a] new license,” implying – but not actually confirming – that “Starlink 5-1” is the first launch for the Starlink Gen2 constellation.
The orbit the launch targeted only matches one of the Gen2 ‘shells’ the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) recently approved. Using a naming scheme that’s been consistent for a year and a half, “5-1” implies that the mission is the first launch of Starlink Gen1’s fifth ‘shell’ or group, which the orbit it was actually launched to explicitly makes impossible. It’s very odd that SpaceX did not explicitly call the mission what it actually is: the first launch of an entirely new Starlink Gen2 constellation. The name ultimately doesn’t matter much, but is now likely to create confusion given that SpaceX’s Starlink Gen1 constellation has a fifth shell that may begin launches in the near future.
Additionally, outside of a single obscure FCC filing submitted two months ago, it’s long been stated and implied that the Starlink Gen2 constellation’s main advantage over Gen1 was the much larger size of the Gen2/V2 satellites. But the satellites launched on “Starlink 5-1” appear to be virtually identical to all recent Starlink V1.5 satellites, which CEO Elon Musk once suggested were so cost-inefficient that they could risk bankrupting SpaceX in November 2021.
There is one obvious explanation for why SpaceX would launch ordinary Starlink V1.5 satellites in place of the larger V2 variants that will supposedly make the internet constellation more financially sustainable: a desire to add new customers as quickly as possible, no matter the relative cost. While a much smaller V1.5 satellite likely offers around 3-8 times less usable bandwidth than one of the larger V2 variants SpaceX is developing, it may still be true that a V1.5 satellite is better than nothing while larger V2 satellites are stuck behind development delays or waiting on SpaceX’s next-generation Starship rocket.
SpaceX will almost certainly want to replace any V1.5 satellites with V2 satellites when the opportunity arises, but in the meantime, V1.5 satellites launched as part of the Gen2 constellation may technically allow SpaceX to temporarily double the amount of bandwidth available where most people (and Starlink customers) live. Ultimately, that means that it makes a lot of sense for SpaceX to prioritize Gen2 launches. It doesn’t appear that SpaceX will go that far, but the Starlink Gen1 constellation is so far along that the company could easily leave the constellation as-is and prioritize Gen2 Falcon 9 launches for all of 2023 without risking an FCC penalty. SpaceX simply needs to finish its Gen1 constellation before April 2027 to avoid breaking those rules.
Instead, it looks like SpaceX will roughly split its launch and V1.5 satellite manufacturing capacity between Starlink Gen1 and Gen2 moving forward. That will let SpaceX significantly expand bandwidth where most customers live while also finishing the polar-orbiting Gen1 shells that will let the older constellation better serve maritime and aviation subscribers, and reach Starlink’s most remote customers.
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”
