News
SpaceX uses robot dog to inspect Starship after first engine test in months
SpaceX’s first orbital-class Starship prototype has survived the first of several expected Raptor tests, kicking off an engine test campaign that could mark a number of new milestones.
With just 20 minutes left in a seven-hour test window, Starship prototype S20 (Ship 20) appeared to either unsuccessfully attempt its first Raptor static fire test or complete its first intentional Raptor preburner test around 11:40 pm CDT (UTC-5) on Monday, October 18th. Rather than a violent jolt and roar kicking up a cloud of dust, Ship 20 came to life with a (relatively) gentle fireball that lasted for several seconds.
In pursuit of maximum efficiency, Starship’s Raptors require two separate closed-cycle gas generators known as preburners to – as the name suggests – turn its cryogenic (very cold) liquid oxygen and methane propellant into a hot gas mixture that the engine re-ignites to produce thrust. A preburner test, if that’s what Starship S20 completed on Monday night, thus involves activating only the first half of that equation, rapidly producing a giant cloud of flammable gas without actually igniting to produce meaningful thrust.
Preburner tests have become increasingly rare as SpaceX’s sea-level Raptor design matured over the course of tens of thousands of seconds of ground testing and, later, thousands of seconds of ground and flight testing on Starship prototypes. Starship S20 had two engines during its first test. One Raptor was the sea-level optimized variant SpaceX has built dozens of and fired for 30,000+ seconds on the ground. The other, however, was a vacuum-optimized Raptor with a much larger nozzle – the first of its kind to participate in any kind of test while installed on a Starship prototype.
It’s possible that Raptor Vacuum (RVac) engines have even more design tweaks outside of their larger expansion nozzles. Regardless, SpaceX has only built and tested around 10 RVac prototypes over the last year, making it a less mature engine than its sea-level cousins. That could explain why SpaceX appears to have chosen to perform a preburner test first instead of jumping straight into a wet dress rehearsal and static fire. That also means that October 18th’s test was likely the first time a Raptor Vacuum engine has (partially) ignited while installed on a Starship.
The above view from a uniquely situated LabPadre camera all but guarantees that Starship S20’s first engine test was a Raptor Vacuum preburner test and doesn’t offer any strong evidence that it was a two-engine test. Ship 20 still has a number of crucial tests ahead of it before SpaceX can even begin to consider it (or its general design) qualified for flight. That includes multiple static fires, including the first side-by-side static fire of two Raptor variants (RVac and Raptor Center), the first simultaneous static fire of more than three engines, and the first Starship static fire with a full six engines installed.
Ship 20’s preburner test is SpaceX’s first Starbase Raptor test since the first Super Heavy booster static fire in mid-July, almost exactly three months ago.
With any luck, S20’s first preburner test has opened the door for an inaugural static fire of one or both installed engines later this week. However, during that preburner test, the giant fireball Raptor Vacuum emitted appeared to ignite several pieces of pad hardware. SpaceX took advantage of one of at least two Boston Dynamics Spot robots on-site to physically walk a camera up to the active pad and inspect several secondary fires. Ultimately, SpaceX appears to have successfully safed Starship with no damage to the vehicle itself, but odds are good that the sources of those secondary fires will need to be fixed and any pad damage repaired before Ship 20 proceeds into static fire testing. SpaceX has two more 5pm-12am test windows scheduled on October 19th and 20th.
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”
