News
SpaceX’s Starship wins $53M from NASA for full-scale orbital refueling test
SpaceX’s Starship program has won $53 million from NASA to perform a full-scale test of orbital propellant transfer, taking the company and space agency’s relationship on the crucial technology to the next level.
NASA revealed the results of its fifth round of “Tipping Point” solicitations on October 14th, announcing awards of more than $370 million total to 14 separate companies. This year’s investments focused on three main categories: “cryogenic fluid management, lunar surface [operations], and closed-loop [i.e. autonomous] descent and landing capability demonstrations.”
In a fairly predictable outcome, the bulk (~$176 million) went to Lockheed Martin and the United Launch Alliance (ULA), while the other half (~$189 million) was split among the twelve remaining companies. In an upset, however, SpaceX was awarded a substantial contract for a crucial aspect of Starship development.
Today’s Tipping Point contract is technically the second time NASA has awarded SpaceX funding for propellant transfer development. In October 2019, almost exactly one year ago, SpaceX won $3 million “to develop and test…cryogenic fluid coupler [prototypes] for large-scale in-space propellant transfer,” marking NASA’s first direct investment in Starship. It seems that NASA was thoroughly satisfied with the results of that icebreaker test – enough to fund a full demonstration of Starship propellant transfer to the tune of $53.2 million.
As Ars Technica’s Eric Berger notes, NASA investing eight figures in a SpaceX Starship propellant transfer demonstration – let alone some $250 million overall in four separate companies – comes as a major surprise. In doing so, NASA is effectively testing the tolerance of political stakeholders in programs like Orion and SLS – programs that exist more to preserve jobs and prop up Congressional stakeholders. If a magnitude(s)-cheaper and more capable solution like distributed launch and orbital refueling were demonstrated under NASA’s own purview, it might become a lot harder to defend heritage programs that have been hemorrhaging ~20% of the space agency’s annual budget for almost a decade.
NASA says that this round of Tipping Point contracts could last up to five years. Aside from a $41.6 million contract with Intuitive Machines to develop a Moon hopper spacecraft capable of propulsively hopping around the lunar surface, the most interesting awards are focused on “cryogenic fluid management.” Eta Space received $27 million for a “small-scale flight demonstration of a complete cryogenic oxygen fluid management system to be integrated with Rocket Lab’s Photon spacecraft bus and launched on an Electron rocket.
Lockheed Martin won $89.7 million for an “in-space demonstration mission using liquid hydrogen…to test more than a dozen cryogenic fluid management technologies.” ULA, of which Lockheed Martin is a member, was awarded $86.2 million to test “precise tank pressure control, tank-to-tank transfer, and multi-week propellant storage” with a Vulcan Centaur upper stage.
Finally, SpaceX won $53.2 million for a “large-scale flight demonstration to transfer 10 metric tons of [liquid oxygen] between tanks on a Starship vehicle.” Notably, this seems to imply that NASA is effectively funding a single-ship orbital flight test in which a Starship prototype will (most likely) attempt to transfer liquid oxygen between its main LOx tank and a smaller ‘header’ tank.
Coming on the heels of an April 2020 contract that awarded SpaceX $135 million to develop a crewed Starship design optimized for Moon landings, NASA is beginning to put some serious money where its mouth is to develop a wide range of innovative solutions that may enable sustainable human space exploration.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
News
Swedish unions consider police report over Tesla Megapack Supercharger
The Tesla Megapack Supercharger opened shortly before Christmas in Arlandastad, outside Stockholm.
Swedish labor unions are considering whether to file a police report related to a newly opened Tesla Megapack Supercharger near Stockholm, citing questions about how electricity is supplied to the site. The matter has also been referred to Sweden’s energy regulator.
Tesla Megapack Supercharger
The Tesla Megapack Supercharger opened shortly before Christmas in Arlandastad, outside Stockholm. Unlike traditional charging stations, the site is powered by an on-site Megapack battery rather than a direct grid connection. Typical grid connections for Tesla charging sites in Sweden have seen challenges for nearly two years due to union blockades.
Swedish labor union IF Metall has submitted a report to the Energy Market Inspectorate, asking the authority to assess whether electricity supplied to the battery system meets regulatory requirements, as noted in a report from Dagens Arbete (DA). The Tesla Megapack on the site is charged using electricity supplied by a local company, though the specific provider has not been publicly identified.
Peter Lydell, an ombudsman at IF Metall, issued a comment about the Tesla Megapack Supercharger. “The legislation states that only companies that engage in electricity trading may supply electricity to other parties. You may not supply electricity without a permit, then you are engaging in illegal electricity trading. That is why we have reported this… This is about a company that helps Tesla circumvent the conflict measures that exist. It is clear that it is troublesome and it can also have consequences,” Lydell said.
Police report under consideration
The Swedish Electricians’ Association has also examined the Tesla Megapack Supercharger and documented its power setup. As per materials submitted to the Energy Market Inspectorate, electrical cables were reportedly routed from a property located approximately 500 meters from the charging site.
Tomas Jansson, ombudsman and deputy head of negotiations at the Swedish Electricians’ Association, stated that the union was assessing whether to file a police report related to the Tesla Megapack Supercharger. He also confirmed that the electricians’ union was coordinating with IF Metall about the matter. “We have a close collaboration with IF Metall, and we are currently investigating this. We support IF Metall in their fight for fair conditions at Tesla,” Jansson said.
News
Tesla HW4.5 spotted in new Model Y, triggers speculation
Owners taking delivery of recent Model Y builds have identified components labeled “AP45.”
Tesla’s Hardware 4.5 computer appears to have surfaced in newly delivered Model Y vehicles, prompting fresh speculation about an interim upgrade ahead of the company’s upcoming AI5 chip.
Owners taking delivery of recent Model Y builds have identified components labeled “AP45,” suggesting Tesla may have quietly started rolling out revised autonomy hardware.
Hardware 4.5 appears in new Model Y units
The potential Hardware 4.5 sighting was first reported by Model Y owner @Eric5un, who shared details of a Fremont-built 2026 Model Y AWD Premium delivered this January. As per the Model Y owner, the vehicle includes a new front camera housing and a 16-inch center display, along with an Autopilot computer labeled “AP45” and part number 2261336-02-A.
The Tesla owner later explained that he confirmed the part number by briefly pulling down the upper carpet liner below the Model Y’s glovebox. Other owners soon reported similar findings. One Model Y Performance owner noted that their December build also appeared to include Hardware 4.5, while another owner of an Austin-built Model Y Performance reported spotting the same “AP45” hardware.
These sightings suggest that Tesla may already be installing revised FSD computers in its new Model Y batches, despite the company not yet making any formal announcements about Hardware 4.5.
What Hardware 4.5 could represent
Clues about Hardware 4.5 have surfaced previously in Tesla’s Electronic Parts Catalog. As reported by NotATeslaApp, the catalog has listed a component described as “CAR COMPUTER – LEFT HAND DRIVE – PROVISIONED – HARDWARE 4.5.” The component, which features the part number 2261336-S2-A, is priced at $2,300.00.
Longtime Tesla hacker @greentheonly has noted that Tesla software has contained references to a possible three-SoC architecture for some time. Previous generations of Tesla’s FSD computer, including Hardware 3 and Hardware 4, use a dual-SoC design for redundancy. A three-SoC layout could allow for higher inference throughput and improved fault tolerance.
Such an architecture could also serve as a bridge to AI5, Tesla’s next-generation autonomy chip expected to enter production later in 2026. As Tesla’s neural networks grow larger and more computationally demanding, Hardware 4.5 may provide additional headroom for vehicles built before AI5 becomes widely available.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk’s Grokipedia is getting cited by OpenAI’s ChatGPT
Some responses generated by OpenAI’s ChatGPT have recently referenced information from Grokipedia.
Some responses generated by OpenAI’s ChatGPT have recently referenced information from Grokipedia, an AI-generated encyclopedia developed by rival xAI, which was founded by Elon Musk. The citations appeared across a limited set of queries.
Reports about the matter were initially reported by The Guardian.
Grokipedia references in ChatGPT
Grokipedia launched in October as part of xAI’s effort to build an alternative to Wikipedia, which has become less centrist over the years. Unlike Wikipedia, which is moderated and edited by humans, Grokipedia is purely AI-powered, allowing it to approach topics with as little bias as possible, at least in theory. This model has also allowed Grokipedia to grow its article base quickly, with recent reports indicating that it has created over 6 million articles, more than 80% of English Wikipedia.
The Guardian reported that ChatGPT cited Grokipedia nine times across responses to more than a dozen user questions during its tests. As per the publication, the Grokipedia citations did not appear when ChatGPT was asked about high-profile or widely documented topics. Instead, Grokipedia was referenced in responses to more obscure historical or biographical claims. The pattern suggested selective use rather than broad reliance on the source, at least for now.
Broader Grokipedia use
The Guardian also noted that Grokipedia citations were not exclusive to ChatGPT. Anthropic’s AI assistant Claude reportedly showed similar references to Grokipedia in some responses, highlighting a broader issue around how large language models identify and weigh publicly available information.
In a statement to The Guardian, an OpenAI spokesperson stated that ChatGPT “aims to draw from a broad range of publicly available sources and viewpoints.” “We apply safety filters to reduce the risk of surfacing links associated with high-severity harms, and ChatGPT clearly shows which sources informed a response through citations,” the spokesperson stated.
Anthropic, for its part, did not respond to a request for comment on the matter. As for xAI, the artificial intelligence startup simply responded with a short comment that stated, “Legacy media lies.”
Swedish unions consider police report over Tesla Megapack Supercharger
Tesla HW4.5 spotted in new Model Y, triggers speculation
