News
SpaceX recovers another Falcon 9 Block 5 booster as reusable rocket fleet grows
Following the upgraded rocket family’s fifth successful launch since its May 2018 debut, SpaceX has returned another Falcon 9 Block 5 booster to land after a drone ship recovery.
Falcon 9 B1049 is now the fourth flight-proven Block 5 booster in SpaceX’s flightworthy rocket fleet, all of which can be expected to fly numerous orbital-class missions before being retired or expended. Despite a relatively slow September and October ahead of SpaceX’s launch manifest, the final two months of 2018 could be quite busy, and will in part rely on the reusability of SpaceX’s Block 5 rockets.
https://twitter.com/_TomCross_/status/1039906864341966848
Thankfully, Falcon 9 Block 5’s reusability prospects are looking extremely positive according to September 11 comments from SpaceX President and COO Gwynne Shotwell, who stated that the rockets (like B1049 today) were returning from launch in even better condition than was initially expected. As a result, it should be imminently possible for SpaceX to refly the same Falcon 9 Block 5 booster after as few as four weeks of refurbishment, with the goal to eventually cut the required maintenance so much that a given booster can refly in ~24 hours.
Shotwell: Falcon 9 first stages come back in much better shape than anticipated. Have refurbishment time down to four weeks; goal is still a one-day turnaround next year. #WSBW
— Jeff Foust (@jeff_foust) September 11, 2018
Still, thanks to the higher-energy geostationary transfer orbit (GTO) missions all Block 5 boosters have thus flown on, reentry and recovery conditions wind up being far less forgiving, suggesting that what Shotwell, Musk, and SpaceX are really referring to when discussing 24-hour reusability is the rapid reuse of Block 5 boosters after low-energy launches to orbits far lower than GTO and lighter payloads in tow.
In particular, Falcon 9 Block 5 launches like Cargo Dragon resupply missions and other miscellaneous smaller satellites should not only leave the boosters in exceptionally pristine condition, but they will also intrinsically leave the rocket just a handful of miles (at most) away from the launch pad, a clear advantage to any truly rapid reuse. Drone ship-recovery Falcon 9s like B1049’s, on the other hand, require at least several days to be towed back to port, fundamentally limiting booster turnaround time for high-energy launches like Telstar 18V, Telstar 19V, Telkom 4, Iridium-7, and Bangabandhu-1.
- Falcon 9 Block 5 booster B1049 returned to Port Canaveral today, ~60 hours after launch. (Tom Cross)
- 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)
- SpaceX’s most recent Florida launch was in early September. (Tom Cross)
- Falcon 9 B1049’s Merlin engines and octaweb. (Tom Cross)
- Recovery robot Octagrabber seen attached to B1049. (Tom Cross)
- A sense of scale. (Tom Cross)
SpaceX’s next launch – Argentinian Earth observation satellite SAOCOM-1A, NET October 7 – will feature a number of critical milestones, including the second reuse of a Falcon 9 Block 5 booster, the first truly light and low-energy launch for the upgraded rocket, the first Landing Zone recovery for Block 5, and the inaugural debut of a dedicated Californian rocket landing zone scarcely a few thousand feet from SpaceX’s Vandenberg launch pad.
Although SAOCOM-1A is likely to be the only SpaceX launch in October, November may very well feature the first launch of Crew Dragon, an uncrewed demonstration mission that will see the spacecraft dock with the International Space Station to ensure that it’s ready for astronauts. SpaceX’s 19th Cargo Dragon launch is also expected to occur as early as December 1st.
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.





