News
SpaceX competitor ULA readies for final launch of 30-year-old Delta II rocket
Long-time SpaceX competitor United Launch Alliance (ULA) is nearly ready for the final launch of its Boeing subsidiary’s Delta II family of rockets, culminating a nearly 30-year history mostly dominated by routine success.
If completed without failure, the launch of NASA’s ICESat-2 satellite – built to track global ice-sheet variation with a huge space-based laser – will mark Delta II’s 100th consecutive success and the rocket’s 153rd fully successful launch overall, an immensely impressive and laudable achievement regardless of the vehicle’s lack of competitive advantage in the modern launch industry.
A teary farewell to Delta II this weekend, so in the run up we're going to give her a send off with a trip down memory lane per the vehicle's evolution from Thor.
Standby for a 7,000 word (yep!) feature article from William Graham on Thursday, with a ton of cool info/old photos. pic.twitter.com/g43PS6kHcr
— NSF – NASASpaceflight.com (@NASASpaceflight) September 13, 2018
Shockingly tiny when compared with modern launch vehicles like Delta IV, Atlas V, and Falcon 9, Delta II measures roughly 39 meters (~128 ft) tall, 2.4 meters (8 ft) in diameter, and weighs 160 metric tons (~350,000 lb) when fully fueled, just over half as tall and significantly less than 30% as heavy as SpaceX’s Falcon 9.
Contracted by NASA in 2013, Delta II’s ICESat-2 launch cost the agency roughly $97 million (2013 USD), although the cost of launch has shrunk in relation to the satellite, which suffered at least $200 million of overruns and 12+ months of delays due to difficulties developing the spacecraft’s impressive space-based LIDAR system. For comparison, NASA contracted a Falcon 9 launch (for the TESS exoplanet observatory, launched in April 2018) from SpaceX for $87 million in 2016, while the USAF has secured several launch contracts with SpaceX for far more complex GPS satellite launches at a cost of almost exactly $97 million apiece.
- The final Delta II rocket is awaiting its last launch from Vandenberg Air Force Base this Saturday. (NASA/Randy Beaudoin)
- A Delta II Heavy rocket seen launching NASA’s THEMIS satellite in 2007. (NASA)
- Falcon 9 Block 5 booster B1049 returned to Port Canaveral today, ~60 hours after launch. Falcon 9 is dramatically cheaper than the aging Delta II. (Tom Cross)
Aging rockets, changing markets
Put simply, the contrast in capabilities offered for equivalent prices soundly demonstrates exactly why Delta II is being phased out. Although capable of better performance with a third upper stage and nine much larger solid rocket boosters (SRBs), that ‘Heavy’ variant of Delta II cost NASA an incredible $150 million per launch in 2009. For the versions of Delta II closer to $100 million per launch, the rocket is able to place 2500-3200 kg (5500-7000 lb) in low Earth orbit and not much at all to any higher energy destinations, which demand a third stage or a heavier rocket. At a comparable price (or much lower in SpaceX’s case), Atlas V and Falcon 9 are able to launch far larger payloads to far higher orbits.
This was by no means the case when Delta II debuted in 1989, and the McDonnell Douglas-built rocket readily earned its impressive reputation as a relatively reliable, capable, and (more or less) affordable launch vehicle compared alongside other rockets available in the ’90s. Delta II wound up as a ULA rocket (sort of) thanks to Boeing and McDonnell Douglas’ 1997 corporate merger, followed in 2006 by Lockheed Martin and Boeing’s cooperative formation of the United Launch Alliance. ULA thus operates Delta II, Delta IV, and Atlas V, all featuring multiple variants and very few distinguishing capabilities when compared amongst themselves.
- Delta II is trucked to the launch pad ahead prior to launch. (NASA)
- The business end of Delta II. (ULA)
- ULA technicians install one of four solid rocket boosters on ICESat-2’s Delta II launch vehicle. (NASA)
- ULA technicians install one of four solid rocket boosters on ICESat-2’s Delta II launch vehicle. (NASA)
The cost of maintaining all those highly duplicative rockets and unique factories and engineering expertise is fundamentally unnatural and reliant upon some sort of noncompetitive market forces (i.e. launch monopolies assured through “block buys” of multiple rockets from NASA and the US military), forces that have been mortally challenged by SpaceX’s reintroduction of competition to the American launch industry.
ICESat-2 is scheduled to launch on Delta II on Saturday, September 15th at 5:46 AM PDT/12:46 UTC. Stay tuned for more information on ICESat-2’s giant space LIDAR payload and mission goals, as well as Teslarati photographer Pauline Acalin’s photos of the fairly historic rocket launch.
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
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.






