News
SpaceX wins Sentinel 6B radar satellite launch contract
SpaceX has won a contract to launch the joint US-European Sentinel 6B radar satellite as early as November 2025.
Five years ago, NASA also chose SpaceX to launch Sentinel 6A, the first of two identical satellites designed to use radar altimeters to determine global sea levels more accurately than ever before. In October 2017, just half a year after SpaceX’s first Falcon 9 rocket booster reuse and well before the cost savings that followed were fully factored in, NASA awarded SpaceX $94 million to launch the 1.1-ton (~2500 lb) to a relatively low 1300-kilometer (~810 mi) orbit.
Five years and two months later, NASA has awarded SpaceX $97 million to launch a virtually identical satellite to the same orbit, from the same launch pad, with the same rocket. SpaceX, however, is far from the same company it was in 2017, and has effectively mastered Falcon booster and payload fairing reuse in the half-decade since.
The update that's rolling out to the fleet makes full use of the front and rear steering travel to minimize turning circle. In this case a reduction of 1.6 feet just over the air— Wes (@wmorrill3) April 16, 2024
Beginning in March 2017, SpaceX has reused Falcon boosters on 130 launches, including sensitive US military missions and even NASA astronaut launches. SpaceX has launched almost 70 internal Starlink missions (carrying more than 3600 SpaceX-built satellites) without bankrupting the company. CEO Elon Musk has stated that the marginal cost of a barebones Falcon 9 launch is just $15 million, while another executive once pegged the total cost of a Falcon 9 launch with flight-proven hardware at $28 million.
Perhaps most significantly, SpaceX won a contract in 2019 to launch NASA’s tiny IXPE X-ray telescope on Falcon 9 for only $50 million. SpaceX completed the mission in December 2021, launching the 330-kilogram (~730 lb) spacecraft into a roughly 600-kilometer (~370 mi) orbit. IXPE was initially expected to launch on Aerojet Rocketdyne’s troubled air-launched Pegasus XL rocket, which last launched a small NASA spacecraft for about $55 million.
Writ large, that may be the best explanation for why SpaceX and its executives – both of which have relentlessly reiterated that the company’s purpose is to radically reduce the cost of orbital launches – don’t feel pressure to translate those major cost decreases into major price cuts. Put simply, despite the fact that SpaceX has openly discussed its intentions for more than a decade, there isn’t a rocket on Earth that can beat Falcon 9’s combination of performance, cadence, reliability, and affordability.
In lieu of even a hint of competitive pressure from the rest of the industry, particularly for contracts limited to US industry, SpaceX appears to have decided that the profits from charging as much as possible outweigh the cynicism those actions could convey. To SpaceX’s credit, the reality is also more gray than some of the limited data might imply. Over the last three years, SpaceX’s prices for smallsat rideshare customers have repeatedly decreased and become more flexible. Additionally, accounting for five years of inflation, SpaceX’s $94 million Sentinel 6A contract would be worth about $114 million today, meaning that its $97 million Sentinel 6B launch contract technically represents a modest 15% discount.
It’s also likely that SpaceX’s main competitors, ULA and Arianespace, would have charged tens of millions of dollars more to launch Sentinel 6A or 6B on their current or next-generation rockets. But their existing rockets have no spare capacity for new contracts and their new Vulcan and Ariane 6 rockets have yet to fly, leaving SpaceX without any real competition.
For better or worse, it appears that Falcon 9 rideshare customers and SpaceX’s own Starlink constellation are the only major beneficiaries of Falcon 9’s extraordinary newfound affordability. With potential competitors like Rocket Lab’s Neutron, Relativity’s Terran-R, Blue Origin’s New Glenn, and ULA’s semi-reusable Vulcan variant all years from market entrance, that’s unlikely to change until the mid-to-late 2020s. Until then, even though SpaceX’s pricing is unlikely to revolutionize others’ access to space, Falcon 9 will remain an exceptionally affordable and available option for all launch customers – including NASA and ESA.
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”
