News
SpaceX bid Starship to launch NASA cubesat constellation
First discussed by SpaceNews, Teslarati can confirm that the mystery launch vehicle SpaceX bid to launch a tiny NASA satellite constellation was none other than Starship – a large, next-generation rocket still deep in development.
Back on February 26th, the space agency announced that it had awarded small rocket startup Astra $7.95 million to launch six small science satellites on three separate Rocket 3.0 flights. Known as TROPICS, NASA says the mini-constellation is designed to monitor tropical storms with a set of microwave sounding instruments. As a constellation, TROPICS will have an unprecedented revisit rate as low as 30 minutes, meaning that weather events could be observed as many as 48 times per day to improve forecasts and advance meteorology. All told, the MIT team estimates a total mission cost of $32 million and the six-satellite TROPICS constellation is expected to weigh no more than 56 kg (~124 lb).
In a routine source selection statement published by NASA on March 11th, reporter Jeff Foust was first to catch on to some oddities included in the brief. Notably, SpaceX was one of four companies to submit a viable proposal and enter the competition – not exactly shocking behavior. However, in the statement, the NASA contracting officer included information heavily implying that SpaceX didn’t propose to launch TROPICS on its proven workhorse Falcon 9 or Falcon Heavy rockets.
As Foust went on to note, the “weaknesses” raised to explain why SpaceX wasn’t chosen (namely an unproven, unlicensed launch vehicle with low schedule certainty) meshed suspiciously well with SpaceX’s next-generation Starship rocket. A source familiar with NASA launch procurement has now confirmed to Teslarati that SpaceX did, in fact, bid Starship to launch the TROPICS constellation.
Starship is currently in the early to middle stages of development, only recently graduated beyond short hop tests, and has yet to secure an orbital launch license from the FAA. While SpaceX CEO Elon Musk recently confirmed the company’s ambition to launch Starship on its first orbital mission(s) as early as July 2021, it’s safe to say that there is a huge amount of uncertainty in that schedule.
On the scale of Starship’s payload target of 100 metric tons to low Earth orbit (LEO), the TROPICS constellation is quite literally a rounding error. Assuming three separate launches are a fundamental requirement for the constellation, each Starship – a rocket substantially larger than a 737 passenger jet – would be carrying the equivalent of a single briefcase containing two shoebox-sized satellites.
While the source was unable to provide the specific price of the offer, they confirmed that SpaceX bid Starship and Super Heavy – not a single-stage-to-orbit Starship configuration as some later speculated. It’s still unclear if SpaceX intended to perform three separate launches or if Starship would have been capable of delivering the entire constellation in a single launch with the huge performance margins offer by such a tiny payload.
Notably, NASA’s selection statement revealed that the price of SpaceX’s Starship launch proposal was more expensive than Astra’s ~$8M offering but less expensive than a Rocket Lab proposal utilizing Electron. From a purely speculative angle, assuming three launches were a necessity, Rocket Lab’s bid would have been around $25M (Electron sells for around $7.5M), leaving SpaceX around $15-20M – not far off a $5M Starship launch cost target floated by company executives over the last few years.
Ultimately, SpaceX did lose out, but the fact that NASA considered a Starship proposal at all is impressive in its own right. TROPICS is scheduled to launch out of Kwajelein Atoll on three separate Astra Rocket 3 vehicles between January and July 2022
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.
Tesla FSD (Supervised) fleet passes 8.4 billion cumulative miles
Elon Musk fires back after Wikipedia co-founder claims neutrality and dubs Grokipedia “ridiculous”
