Connect with us

News

SpaceX debuts Starship’s new Super Heavy booster design

Starship lifts off atop a massive Super Heavy booster, featuring six landing legs and up to 37 Raptor engines. (SpaceX)

Published

on

Speaking on Saturday night (Sept. 28th) at the base of the SpaceX’s Starship Mk1 prototype in Boca Chica, Texas, CEO Elon Musk delivered an update on the progress the company is making with Starship and its Super Heavy booster, including the first renders of the massive first stage’s new steel design.

In the 2019 design update Musk stated that the booster will match Starship in diameter at 9m (~29.5ft) and will feature a multi-engine design, colossal grid fins, and six landing legs. Super Heavy will stand 68m (223 ft) tall and weigh up to 3300 tons when fully loaded with liquid oxygen and methane propellant.

While Super Heavy is designed to support up to 37 Raptor engines, it is meant to be reconfigurable and ideally will only require 24 – 31 Raptor engines. According to Musk, the booster is actually designed to add or subtract engines as necessary based on payload demands and launching conditions, while also adding the benefit of massive redundancy in the event of mid-flight engine failure(s).

The most critical component for the booster, according to Musk, is that there is “a lot of force pushing up.” He states that to launch Starship, the Super Heavy booster would ideally produce roughly 7500 tons of thrust – about twice the thrust of that of a Saturn V rocket. For a reusable rocket design – such as with the Super Heavy booster – a high thrust to weight ratio (about 1.5 : 1) is a necessity for efficient operation.

Additionally, Musk briefly spotlighted other design adjustments including a change in grid fin design and the configuration of the landing legs. Many of the principles that have been flight-proven with Falcon 9 boosters – such as the use of grid fins and landing legs – will be carried over and scaled up with the Super Heavy booster.

Advertisement

Currently, the titanium grid fins used Falcon 9/Heavy boosters are square, whereas Super Heavy – requiring far larger control surfaces – will instead feature diamond-shaped grid fins that Musk said “works better.”

As seen in the animation of the Super Heavy – Starship launch, the booster is expected to perform a flip after first stage separation to return back to land at (or close to) the launch site, just like a Falcon 9. Musk explains that the aerodynamic shrouds covering the booster’s landing legs will serve no functional, lift-producing purpose. However, unlike Falcon 9 landing legs that retract only moments before touchdown, Super Heavy’s landing legs will be fixed, aside from – perhaps – some mild shock absorption capabilities.

Starship Mk1 stands vertical in Boca Chica, Texas ahead of Musk’s September 28th presentation. (Teslarati – Eric Ralph)

Musk seems confident that both Super Heavy and Starship will begin operation to support orbital flights relatively soon. The Super Heavy booster will support Starship launches from pads in Boca Chica, Texas and at Cape Canaveral, Florida’s Launch Complex 39A as early as six months from now. The Starship Mk1 prototype is expected to begin an aggressive flight-test campaign to altitudes of at least 20km (65,000ft) within the next 1-2 months, according to Musk.

Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Comments

News

Tesla FSD (Supervised) fleet passes 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.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

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.

Credit: Tesla

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. 

Advertisement

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.

Continue Reading

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.”

Published

on

UK Government, CC BY 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

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.

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

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.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla Charging

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. 

Advertisement

“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. 

Advertisement

“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. 

Continue Reading