Connect with us

News

SpaceX Falcon 9 booster could be first to launch from all 3 company pads

Falcon 9 Block 5 booster B1046 seen during both of its post-launch landings. (SpaceX/SpaceX)

Published

on

A week after its original launch target, SpaceX launch engineers and technicians appear to have completed an additional suite of preflight checks that triggered an unusually long delay from November 19 to November 28.

As a sort of happy accident, the mission – a Spaceflight Industries rideshare carrying ~64 satellites – will not only be the first time SpaceX has launched a given Falcon 9 booster three times, but it will also become the first time SpaceX has launched the same Falcon 9 booster from all three of the company’s orbital launch facilities.

Advertisement

Likely a matter of caution over expediency, that extra time was used to make sure that the mission’s twice-flown Falcon 9 B1046 booster is as ready as possible for its third launch, a subtle but absolutely critical milestone for Falcon 9 reusability. More importantly, from an operational standpoint, this is something that the company has simply never attempted, meaning that while it’s similar in concept to the numerous booster reuses SpaceX engineers and technicians have already pulled off, every aspect of B1046’s refurbishment and preparation for another launch is new territory for all.

In this sense, even the most minor observations and procedural developments are likely being documented with extreme care, paving the way for the systematic refurbishment of Block 5 boosters with 2+ launches on their manifest. Similar to how car mechanics know to look at and for dramatically different things depending on the age of the car and the time since its last maintenance, reusable rockets are likely to require an even more exotic and unintuitive approach to multi-flight maintenance and repair diagnostics. As such, it should come as little surprise that SpaceX chose to delay SSO-A a few days to ensure that the rocket is ready to safely place its payload in orbit.

Advertisement

Pecking orders

Aside from the extreme importance of its third launch, Falcon 9 B1046 will be subject to another rather unique situation. Barely a mile or two northeast of SpaceX’s SLC-4 launch complex, a ULA Delta IV Heavy rocket is assembled and nearly ready to place the National Reconnaissance Office’s classified NROL-71 satellite into a high-energy Earth orbit. If the extraordinarily expensive launch vehicle (~$350-400M) it sits atop of is any sign, NROL-71 is a massive satellite that cost the NRO anywhere from $500M to $2B to design, procure, and prepare for launch.

In other words, the sheer capital at risk has likely resulted in a bit of manifest and range jockeying between Falcon 9/SpaceX and Delta Heavy/ULA/NRO. Under normal circumstances, Falcon 9 B1046 could without a doubt perform a Return-To-Launch-Site (RTLS) recovery, sending the booster all the back to SLC-4 for a landing at LZ-4.

https://www.instagram.com/p/BqoCpFulAAx/

Instead, likely prevented from landing at LZ-4 due to the slight chance that Falcon 9 could impact at or around ULA’s launch pad in an off-nominal situation, SpaceX has decided to station drone ship Just Read The Instructions less than 30 miles (50 km) off the coast of Vandenberg Air Force Base. In this odd and unused landing mode, Falcon 9 will perform a sort of RTLS Lite, returning back in the direction of the launch site but not going far enough to actually reach it.

Advertisement

In doing so, B1046 will – fingers crossed – become the first Falcon 9 booster to land on both SpaceX drone ships and launch from all three of the company’s orbital facilities, LC-40 (Cape Canaveral Air Force Station), LC-39A (Kennedy Space Center), and SLC-4 (Vandenberg Air Force Base).

Eric Ralph is Teslarati's senior spaceflight reporter and has been covering the industry in some capacity for almost half a decade, largely spurred in 2016 by a trip to Mexico to watch Elon Musk reveal SpaceX's plans for Mars in person. Aside from spreading interest and excitement about spaceflight far and wide, his primary goal is to cover humanity's ongoing efforts to expand beyond Earth to the Moon, Mars, and elsewhere.

Advertisement
Comments

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.

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