Connect with us

News

SpaceX Falcon 9 wins Korean launch contract as 2019 mystery missions persist

A brand new Falcon 9 rocket rolls out to Pad 39A in February 2019. (NASA - Joel Kowsky)

Published

on

SpaceX has silently announced that Falcon 9 won a contract for a South Korean military communications satellite, currently scheduled to launch from the company’s Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS) LC-40 pad no earlier than November 2019.

Subcontracted from Lockheed Martin to Airbus Defense and Space in 2016, the satellite – known as Anasis II (formerly KMilSatCom 1) – is based on a common bus built by Airbus and could weigh anywhere from 3500 to 6000 kilograms (7500-13,200 lb). Falcon 9 will be tasked with launching Anasis II to geostationary transfer orbit (GTO), after which the satellite will use its own onboard propulsion to circularize the orbit and begin operations. Although the Korean contract brings SpaceX one step closer to its goal of 18-21 launches (excluding Starlink) in 2019, it also raises the question: what mystery missions are missing from public launch manifests?

Manifest Mystery

As previously discussed in both Teslarati articles and newsletters, comments from SpaceX executives in February and May 2019 reiterate the company’s expectation of 18-21 launches in 2019, excluding Starlink. Hofeller’s “more than 21 launches” admittedly came more than two months before a catastrophic Crew Dragon failure threw the spacecraft’s launch manifest into limbo.

Three months later, SpaceX President and COO Gwynne Shotwell reiterated the idea that SpaceX could beat its 2018 launch record (21 launches) or at least get close. Curiously, she specifically noted that SpaceX’s purported 18-21 launch manifest excluded Starlink missions, of which SpaceX has already launched one. In short, SpaceX has completed 7 launches in 2019 (6 if Starlink v0.9 is excluded). The company’s public manifest – unofficially cobbled together by fans – shows 9 more launches scheduled for a total of 15 non-Starlink launches in 2019.

To meet Shotwell’s expected 18-21 non-Starlink launches, anywhere from 3 to 6 missions are apparently missing from publicly-managed launch manifests. It’s unclear if SpaceX actually has enough launch-ready customers to achieve those ambitious targets. Additionally, SpaceX is currently on track to complete 8 launches total (1 Starlink) in the first half of 2019. In 2017 and 2018 (two years without interruption), SpaceX consistently launched an equivalent number (or more) missions in the first half of the year when compared to the second half, and both years have maxed out at 9 launches in H2.

SpaceX will have to beat that H2 record to reach 18 launches in 2019 even if Starlink missions are counted. Meanwhile, SpaceX says that as many as 1-5 additional Starlink launches are scheduled for 2019, bringing the total number of missions as high as 20-27 in differing best-case scenarios. Practically speaking, between SpaceX’s Pad 39A and LC-40 launch facilities, the company could easily maintain a biweekly or even weekly cadence (13-26 launches in H2 2019). The real constraint, however, is hardware availability – i.e. whether SpaceX has the rocket pieces and flight-ready satellite(s) it needs to launch a given mission.

SpaceX has an extremely busy 2019 manifest according to executives like Gwynne Shotwell. The company will need many a Falcon 9 upper stage (top left) and Falcon 9 booster (B1057, top right; B1056, bottom) to reach its ambitious targets. (USAF SMC, SpaceX, Tom Cross)

Can SpaceX do it?

This is an extremely hard question to answer, as all details that really matter are of the organizational, company-secrets sort that SpaceX just doesn’t publicize. From a technical and practical perspective, the answer is a reasonable confident “yes.” If Falcon Heavy Flight 3 (STP-2) is completed successfully, SpaceX will have an impressive fleet of at least 8 flight-proven Falcon 9-class boosters. Even assuming that no progress is made beyond the current Block 5 turnaround average of ~110 days (~3.5 months), SpaceX’s current fleet should be able to immediately support four launches and an additional 8-12 before the end of 2019.

The primary limit, then, would be SpaceX’s ability to produce Falcon 9 upper stages and fairings, as well as the stamina and quality of the company’s managers and employees. Even then, the question of SpaceX’s 3-6 mystery launches will remain unanswered until either the customer or launch provider choose to open up. For now, we wait…

Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.

Advertisement

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

The figure appears on Tesla’s official safety page, which tracks performance data for FSD (Supervised) and other safety technologies.

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