Musk aiming to send uncrewed Starship to Mars by end of 2026
LOS ANGELES - Two days after the latest in a string of test-flight setbacks for his big new Mars spacecraft, Starship, Mr Elon Musk said on May 29 he foresees the futuristic vehicle making its first uncrewed voyage to the red planet at the end of 2026.
Mr Musk presented a detailed Starship development timeline in a video posted online by his Los Angeles area-based rocket company, SpaceX, a day after departing the administration of US President Donald Trump as head of a tumultuous campaign to slash government bureaucracy.
The billionaire entrepreneur had said earlier that he was planning to scale back his role in government to focus greater attention on his various businesses, including SpaceX and electric car and battery maker Tesla Inc.
Mr Musk acknowledged that his latest timeline for reaching Mars hinged on whether Starship can accomplish a number of challenging technical feats during its flight-test development, particularly a post-launch refuelling manoeuvre in Earth orbit.
The end of 2026 would coincide with a slim window that occurs once every two years when Mars and Earth align around the sun for the closest trip between the two planets, which would take seven to nine months to transit by spacecraft.
Mr Musk gave his company a 50-50 chance of meeting that deadline.
If Starship were not ready by that time, SpaceX would wait another two years before trying again, Mr Musk suggested in the video.
The first flight to Mars would carry a simulated crew consisting of one or more robots of the Tesla-built humanoid Optimus design, with the first human crews following in the second or third landings.
Mr Musk said he envisioned eventually launching 1,000 to 2,000 ships to Mars every two years to quickly establish a self-sustaining permanent human settlement.
Nasa is currently aiming to return humans to the surface of the moon aboard Starship as early as 2027 - more than 50 years after its last manned lunar landings of the Apollo era - as a stepping stone toward ultimately launching astronauts to Mars sometime in the 2030s.
Mr Musk, who has advocated for a more Mars-focused human spaceflight programme, has previously said he was aiming to send an unmanned SpaceX vehicle to the red planet as early as 2018 and was targeting 2024 to launch a first crewed mission there.
The SpaceX founder was scheduled to deliver a live webcast presentation billed as 'The Road to Making Life Multiplanetary' from the company's Starbase, Texas, launch site on the night of May 27, following a ninth test flight of Starship that evening.
But the speech was cancelled without notice after Starship spun out of control and disintegrated in a fireball about 30 minutes after launch and roughly halfway through its flight path without achieving some of its most important test goals.
Two preceding test flights in January and March failed in more spectacular fashion, with the spacecraft blowing to pieces on ascent moments after liftoff, raining debris over parts of the Caribbean and forcing scores of commercial jetliners to change course as a precaution.
Mr Musk shrugged off the latest mishap on May 27 with a brief post on X, saying it produced a lot of 'good data to review' and promising a faster launch 'cadence' for the next several test flights. REUTERS
Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Times
a day ago
- Business Times
Elon Musk says first Tesla drove itself from factory to customer
[AUSTIN] Tesla chief executive Elon Musk said a Tesla Model Y SUV drove itself from the company's factory near Austin to a customer's home in the company's latest move to showcase its push into autonomous driving. In a post on X, Musk announced the company made an autonomous delivery of a Tesla Model Y from factory to a customer's home, noting the delivery was made 'across town', and included highways. Musk said the delivery did not include anyone in the car and no remote operators were in control of the car. While the post did not include video or images, Musk posted that a video of the event would come soon. Tesla's head of artificial intelligence (AI) and autopilot, Ashok Elluswamy, said the vehicle reached a max speed of 72 miles per hour (116 km per hour). The delivery was one day ahead of the date Musk had earlier set for the first autonomous delivery, Jun 28, which will be his 54th birthday. Tesla's first autonomous delivery highlights Musk's bet that AI and robotics represent the future of his electric car company. It comes days after Tesla began its long-awaited robotaxi service on Jun 22, offering a select group of influencers and investors rides in a small fleet of self-driving Model Y SUVs in a limited area of Austin. Musk previewed both events in a post earlier this month on X, and has said the company plans to eventually have millions of robotaxis on the road in the future. Musk is counting on eventually churning out large numbers of robotaxis and Optimus humanoid robots to underpin the electric vehicle company's next chapter. Sales in key markets including North America and Europe remain sluggish and the company has faced a consumer backlash to Musk's role in US President Donald Trump's administration. Multiple executives have also left the company in recent weeks. The hands-free delivery is an extension of a capability Tesla touted in April, when it posted a video showing cars moving autonomously from its Texas assembly lines to logistics lots prior to shipping. It's unclear whether autonomous deliveries will become a meaningful part of Tesla's operations. Tesla did not immediately respond to a request for comment. BLOOMBERG
Business Times
a day ago
- Business Times
Outperformed by AI: Time to replace your analyst?
SIX artificial intelligence (AI) models recently went head-to-head with seasoned equity analysts to produce Swot (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) analyses, and the results were striking. In many cases, the AI didn't just hold its own; it uncovered risks and strategic gaps the human experts missed. This wasn't theory. My colleagues and I ran a controlled test of leading large language models (LLMs) against analyst consensus on three companies – Deutsche Telekom (Germany), Daiichi Sankyo (Japan), and Kirby Corporation (the US). Each was the most positively rated stock in its region as of February 2025 – the kind of 'sure bet' that analysts overwhelmingly endorse. We deliberately chose market favourites because if AI can identify weaknesses where humans see only strengths, that's a powerful signal. It suggests that AI has the potential not just to support analyst workflows, but to challenge consensus thinking and possibly change the way investment research gets done. The uncomfortable truth about AI performance Here's what should make you sit up: With sophisticated prompting, certain LLMs exceeded human analysts in specificity and depth of analysis. Let that sink in. The machines produced more detailed, comprehensive Swots than professionals who have spent years in the industry. But before you eliminate the need for human analysts, there's a crucial caveat. While AI excels at data synthesis and pattern recognition, it can't read a CEO's body language or detect the subtext in management's 'cautiously optimistic' guidance. As one portfolio manager told us, 'Nothing replaces talking to management to understand how they really think about their business.' The 40 per cent difference that changes everything The most striking finding? Advanced prompting improved AI performance by up to 40 per cent. The difference between asking 'Give me a Swot for Deutsche Telekom' and providing detailed instructions is the difference between a Wikipedia summary and institutional-grade research. This isn't optional anymore — prompt engineering is becoming as essential as Excel was in the 2000s. Investment professionals who master this skill will extract exponentially more value from AI tools. Those who don't will watch competitors produce superior analysis in a fraction of the time. BT in your inbox Start and end each day with the latest news stories and analyses delivered straight to your inbox. Sign Up Sign Up The model hierarchy: Not all AI is created equal We tested and ranked six state-of-the-art models: 1. Google's Gemini Advanced 2.5 (Deep Research mode) – The clear winner 2. OpenAI's o1 Pro – Close second with exceptional reasoning 3. ChatGPT 4.5 – Solid but notably behind the leaders 4. Grok 3 – Elon Musk's challenger showing promise 5. DeepSeek R1 – China's dark horse, fast but less refined 6. ChatGPT 4o – The baseline for comparison The reasoning-optimised models (those with 'deep research' capabilities) consistently outperformed standard versions such as ChatGPT-4o. They provided more context, better fact-checking, and fewer generic statements. Think of it as hiring a senior analyst versus a junior analyst – both can do the job, but one needs far less handholding. Timing matters too. The best models took 10 to 15 minutes to produce comprehensive Swots, while simpler models delivered in less than a minute. There's a direct correlation between thinking time and output quality – something human analysts have always known. The European AI deficit: A strategic vulnerability Here's an uncomfortable reality for European readers: Of the models tested, five are American and one is Chinese. Europe's absence from the AI leadership board isn't just embarrassing – it's strategically dangerous. When DeepSeek emerged from China with competitive performance at a fraction of Western costs, it triggered what some called a 'Sputnik moment' for AI. The message was clear: AI leadership can shift rapidly, and those without domestic capabilities risk technological dependence. For European fund managers, this means relying on foreign AI for critical analysis. Do these models truly understand European Central Bank communications or German regulatory filings as well as they grasp US Federal Reserve statements? The jury's out, but the risk is real. The practical integration playbook Our research points to a clear four-step approach for how investment professionals should use these tools: 1. Hybrid, not replacement: Use AI for the heavy lifting – initial research, data synthesis, pattern identification. Reserve human judgment for interpretation, strategy, and anything requiring genuine insight into management thinking. The optimal workflow: AI drafts, humans refine. 2. Prompt libraries are your new alpha source: Develop standardised prompts for common tasks. A well-crafted Swot prompt is intellectual property. Share best practices internally, but guard your best prompts like trading strategies. 3. Model selection matters: For deep analysis, pay for reasoning-optimised models. For quick summaries, standard models suffice. Using GPT 4o for complex analysis is like bringing a knife to a gunfight. 4. Continuous evaluation: New models launch almost weekly. Our six-criteria evaluation framework (structure, plausibility, specificity, depth, cross-checking, meta-evaluation) provides a consistent way to assess whether the latest model truly improves on its predecessors. Beyond Swot: The expanding frontier While we focused on Swot analysis, the implications extend across the entire investment process. We list a few of these below, but there are many more: Earnings call summarisation and analysis in minutes, not hours ESG red flag identification across entire portfolios Regulatory filing analysis at scale Competitive intelligence gathering Market sentiment synthesis Each application frees human analysts for higher-value work. The question isn't whether to adopt AI – it's how quickly you can integrate it effectively. The uncomfortable questions Let's address what many are thinking: 'Will AI replace analysts?' Not entirely, but it will replace analysts who don't use AI. The combination of human plus AI will outperform either alone. 'Can I trust AI output?' Trust but verify. AI can hallucinate facts or miss context. Human oversight remains essential, especially for investment decisions. 'Which model should I use?' Start with Gemini Advanced 2.5 or o1 Pro (or the successors) for complex analysis. But given the pace of change, reassess quarterly. 'What if my competitors use AI better?' Then you'll be playing catch-up while they're finding alpha. Staying on the sidelines while competitors build AI advantage means ceding ground in an increasingly competitive landscape. The path forward The genie is out of the bottle. LLMs have demonstrated they can perform analytical work in seconds that once took days. They bring speed, consistency, and vast knowledge bases. Used effectively, they're like having a tireless team of junior analysts who never sleep. But here's the key: Success requires thoughtful integration, not wholesale adoption. Treat AI output as you would a junior analyst's draft – valuable input requiring senior review. Master prompt engineering. Choose models wisely. Maintain human oversight. For European professionals, there's an additional imperative: Push for domestic AI development. Technological dependence in critical financial infrastructure is a strategic vulnerability no region can afford. Master the tools – or be outpaced by them Embrace these tools intelligently, or watch competitors leave you behind. The winners in this new landscape will be those who combine AI's computational power with human insight, intuition, and relationship skills. The future of investment analysis isn't human or AI – it's human and AI. Those who recognise this and act accordingly will thrive. Those who don't will find themselves outperformed not by machines, but by humans who learned to work with them. Your next analyst hire might still need that coffee break. But they'd better know how to prompt an LLM, evaluate its output, and add the human insight that transforms data into alpha. Because in 2025, that's the new standard. The tools are here. The frameworks exist. The winners will be the ones who know how to use them. This content has been adapted from an article that first appeared in Enterprising Investor at The full study can be found here The writer, CFA, is chief investment officer at MHS CapInvest, where he employs advanced AI tools to enhance allocation, stock selection, portfolio construction, and risk management for different market capitalisations, He trains teams at DAX-listed companies on generative AI integration and helps investment professionals leverage tools like ChatGPT and Gemini to enhance their performance.
CNA
a day ago
- CNA
Story on Tesla hiring Cruise AI executive withdrawn
A story saying Telsa had hired a former Cruise AI executive as the automaker's AI director has been withdrawn. Reuters picked up the story from the news website Electrek. There will be no substitute. STORY_NUMBER: L4N3SU0YP STORY_DATE: 27/06/2025
