News
SpaceX scraps Starship SN8 wreckage, clears landing zone for next launch
In spite of tentative plans for preservation, SpaceX has fully scrapped the wreckage of the first high-altitude Starship prototype, clearing the landing zone it impacted for its successor’s imminent launch debut.
Known as serial number 8 or SN8, the Starship prototype was the first of any kind to fly beyond 150 meters (~500 ft), reaching an altitude of 12.5 km (~7.8 mi) on December 9th during its breathtaking launch debut. In an unexpected twist, SpaceX kept Starship SN8’s thrust to weight ratio as low as possible, stretching what could have been a two or three-minute test into an almost seven-minute ordeal with three consecutive Raptor engine cutoffs during the ascent.
At apogee, SN8 used cold gas thrusters to flip into a belly-down orientation and free-fell ~95% of the way back to Earth before igniting two of its three Raptor engines, performing a wild powered flip back into a vertical landing position and nearly securing a soft landing. Unfortunately, around 10-20 seconds before that planned landing, what Musk later described as low methane header tank pressure starved the Starship’s engines of fuel and more or less cut all appreciable thrust, causing SN8 to reach its landing zone traveling about 40 m/s (~90 mph) too fast. The rocket impacted the concrete pad, crumpled, and exploded.
By all accounts, success was one of the less likely outcomes SpaceX expected from SN8’s high-altitude debut, with Musk himself estimating the odds of total success to be just 33%. Additionally, Starship SN8 effectively made it all the way to a low-speed landing regime that Starships SN5 and SN6 all but flawlessly demonstrated with back-to-back 150m hops and landings in August and September 2020.
In other words, despite the explosive end, SN8’s high-altitude launch debut was a spectacular success for SpaceX’s Starship program – possibly even preferable to a perfect landing given that it uncovered an unexpected issue with fuel tank pressurization. Beyond the landing failure, the Starship checked every single box on SpaceX’s test flight list, successfully debuting multiple Raptors, demonstrating multiple in-flight engine shutdowns and engine relights; proving that an unprecedented ‘skydiver-style’ landing maneuver is possible and viable; and successfully testing Starship’s ability to control itself in that bellyflop orientation with thrusters and four massive flaps.
Speaking in a recent interview with Ars Technica, in the words of pragmatic SpaceX COO and President Gwynne Shotwell, SN8’s launch debut “de-risked [the Starship] program pretty massively.” According to Musk, SpaceX engineers were quickly able to determine why Starship SN8’s methane header tank was unable to maintain the fuel flow (pressure) needed for Raptor’s landing burn(s) and quickly implemented a solution.
Instead of pressurizing autogenously with methane gas, Starship SN9 will use helium to pressurize its fuel header tank, serving as a temporary fix while SpaceX determines what changes need to be made to get rid of that helium crutch. Landing pad now cleared of Starship remains and SN8’s impact crater more or less repaired, the only thing standing between Starship SN9 and its own 12.5 km launch debut is a triple-Raptor static fire test. Originally expected as early as January 4th, SpaceX never made it more than a few minutes into the attempt, while a backup window on January 5th was canceled later that evening. The test could now occur no earlier than (NET) Wednesday, January 6th.
Thankfully, although SpaceX was unable to save the entirety of Starship SN8’s wrecked nose section, the company did manage to extract a largely intact nose flap. The rest of the remains were scrapped on site and trucked away but it’s possible that certain significant components of SN8 – particularly the recovered flap – will eventually find themselves on display at one or more SpaceX facilities.
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.
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”
