Elon Musk's SpaceX rockets keep blowing up at worst possible time
By
Hadas Gold
, CNN
Another SpaceX Starship goes up in flames.
Photo:
NASASpaceflight
Analysis:
As Elon Musk returns his focus to his businesses, one of his most important companies just had another setback: a
SpaceX Starship rocket exploded
in an immense fireball on Wednesday during a routine ground test.
The explosion marks the fourth failure in a row for SpaceX's Starship, all while Musk's other companies and his personal brand struggle to recover after his foray into politics.
Starship is supposed to help reach NASA's goal of bringing American astronauts back to the moon by 2027: The US space agency is paying SpaceX up to about US$4 billion for the mission. Although SpaceX has said that the last three launches before Wednesday's explosions were successful in testing some elements, all ended in mid-flight failures.
SpaceX has long made the case that failures during the testing and development phase are not the harbingers of disaster they may seem. The company embraces a design philosophy called "rapid iterative development" that emphasises building relatively low-cost prototypes and launching frequent test flights.
SpaceX believes the approach allows the company to hash out rocket designs faster and at cheaper price points than relying on slower, more methodical engineering approaches that can guarantee a vehicle's success.
But the very fiery Starship explosion comes as Musk has been trying to restore his reputation as he returned to focus on his businesses after a controversial stint in the Trump administration. After several months as a top White House adviser and leading the Department of government Efficiency, Musk is now
taking a step back from full-time government work
refocusing his time on his companies, including Tesla, which has struggled in part as a result of Musk's alliance with the Trump administration.
Upon his return, Musk has sought to promote an image of safety and reliability at Tesla, which is aiming to launch its driverless robotaxis in Austin on Sunday - although the initial phase is expected to be limited to less than two dozen cars, and Musk has warned the date could shift.
But before the launch, a group of Texas lawmakers
have asked Tesla
to delay the rollout of its robotaxi service until September, citing a new law on autonomous driving set to take effect. And Tesla's
share price
slipped this week, before recovering somewhat, following a report from
Business Insider
that the company plans to pause production on Cybertruck and Model Y lines for a week at its Austin factory for maintenance, the third such shutdown this year.
And in Europe, where Tesla sales have been plunging, Chinese car maker BYD sold more pure battery electric vehicles over Tesla in Europe for the first time, according to
a report from JATO
, an automotive market research firm.
Elon Musk
Photo:
AFP
Musk also has his work cut out for him at his AI company, xAI.
Bloomberg reported
the company "is burning through US$1 billion a month" as the cost of building out its AI model "races ahead of the limited revenues."
Musk brushed off the report. "Bloomberg is talking nonsense," he
posted on X
in response.
They don't.
Also, Bloomberg is talking nonsense.
Musk also publicly disputed his own AI chatbot Grok, when it posted a fact check about politically motivated violence, noting that "Since 2016, data suggests right-wing political violence has been more frequent and deadly." That response lines up with most publicly available data.
But Musk didn't agree. "Major fail, as this is objectively false. Grok is parroting legacy media. Working on it." he
posted
.
Musk seems to be brushing off the setbacks, especially with SpaceX. He said last month that he hoped Starship would make its inaugural flight to Mars by the end of next year - a target that looks increasingly unlikely to be met.
"Just a scratch," he
posted after Starship's explosion
before posting "RIP Ship 36" and memes.
When a user asked Musk's chatbot Grok why Musk was posting memes, Grok responded "The timing suggests it's likely a humorous comment on the SpaceX Starship explosion that occurred on June 18, rather than targeting a specific person. Musk often uses memes to downplay such setbacks."
Musk responded with a bullseye emoji.
-CNN
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
1News
24 minutes ago
- 1News
Musk renews criticism of Trump's big bill as it faces key Senate vote
Elon Musk today doubled down on his distaste for President Donald Trump's sprawling tax and spending cuts bill, arguing the legislation that Republican senators are scrambling to pass would kill jobs and bog down burgeoning industries. 'The latest Senate draft bill will destroy millions of jobs in America and cause immense strategic harm to our country,' Musk wrote on X on today as the Senate was scheduled to call a vote to open debate on the nearly 1,000-page bill. 'It gives handouts to industries of the past while severely damaging industries of the future.' The Tesla and SpaceX CEO, whose birthday is also Saturday (local time), later posted that the bill would be 'political suicide for the Republican Party'. The criticisms reopen a recent fiery conflict between the former head of the Department of Government Efficiency and the administration he recently left. They also represent yet another headache for Republican Senate leaders who have spent the weekend working overtime to get the legislation through their chamber so it can pass by Trump's Fourth of July deadline. Musk has previously made his opinions about Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' clear. Days after he left the federal government last month with a laudatory celebration in the Oval Office, he blasted the bill as 'pork-filled' and a 'disgusting abomination". ADVERTISEMENT 'Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it,' he wrote on X earlier this month. In another post, the wealthy GOP donor who had recently forecasted that he'd step back from political donations threatened to fire lawmakers who 'betrayed the American people'. US President Donald Trump. (Source: Getty) When Trump clapped back to say he was disappointed with Musk, back-and-forth fighting erupted and quickly escalated. Musk suggested without evidence that Trump, who spent the first part of the year as one of his closest allies, was mentioned in files related to sex abuser Jeffrey Epstein. Musk ultimately tried to make nice with the administration, saying he regretted some of his posts that 'went too far'. Trump responded in kind in an interview with The New York Post, saying, 'Things like that happen. I don't blame him for anything'. It's unclear how Musk's latest broadsides will influence the fragile peace he and the president had enjoyed in recent weeks. The White House didn't immediately respond to a request for comment. Musk has spent recent weeks focused on his businesses, and his political influence has waned since he left the administration. Still, the wealthy businessman poured hundreds of millions of dollars into Trump's campaign in 2024, demonstrating the impact his money can have if he's passionate enough about an issue or candidate to restart his political spending.
Otago Daily Times
an hour ago
- Otago Daily Times
Our timeless companion: Michelle Thaller's starry eyed gaze
Astrophysicist Dr Michelle Thaller has spent a lifetime with her head in the stars, she tells Paul Gorman. In a world where terrible things are happening, a reminder we are inconsequential motes on the scale of the universe can be somewhat comforting. ''For you are dust, and to dust you shall return'', the sage words from The Book of Genesis say. The same message is coming from one of Nasa's top scientists, astrophysicist Dr Michelle Thaller, who arrived in Dunedin at Matariki to be the special guest at this week's New Zealand International Science Festival. ''I've been wanting to spend a good amount of time in New Zealand for decades,'' she says. ''When it comes to celebrating Matariki, the idea that we come from the stars and we will go back to the stars, this is literally true.'' Recently retired after 27 years at Nasa, she will be sharing her knowledge of space and the universe at several festival events. Thaller has specialised in the evolution of binary-star systems and is one of the world's top science communicators. She sees the universe as a wondrous place, not something to fear because its stupendous vastness makes it cold and frightening. ''For me it's a bit more of a thrill than a fear. You know, the reason you get on a roller coaster is that sort of pleasant type of fear - you can play with the emotions: 'I'm afraid of this, but it's going to be OK'. ''But the interesting thing for me is that, and I don't know why, but the night sky has always seemed like an old friend, and I've met people all over the world who feel that way.'' While the universe has no emotional state to it, she says astronomy is not the study of ''something far away and dark and uncaring''. It is where we come from. ''There's nothing that makes the atoms of our bodies other than the stars - carbon and calcium and all of that - and the only place you have natural nuclear fusion is inside the core of a star, and you build up the atoms into bigger and bigger atoms. ''Then there's some of the things that our body needs, like iodine. Our bodies would not work without some of those trace elements, and the only time we've ever seen those trace elements made is with pulsars, these neutron stars, in unimaginably huge explosions.'' Thaller's Nasa career began at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) in California as a senior scientist after graduating with her doctorate from Georgia State University and carrying out postdoctoral research at the California Institute of Technology (Caltech). In 2009, she moved to the Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland and ultimately became the assistant director of science there. She also did a three-year stint at Nasa headquarters in Washington DC. While at JPL she became interested in science communication and was heavily involved in live Nasa broadcasts and also as a spokesperson on television programmes including How The Universe Works , and on news stories. Her resume lists two Webby awards highlighting Nasa's social media programme among her achievements, as well as this year's accolade of Nasa's Exceptional Achievement Medal, which has previously been won by late astronomer Carl Sagan and the Apollo mission astronauts. She is an adjunct professor at the University of Wisconsin and also works with the Smithsonian Institution on adult education and travel programmes. Hailing from Waukesha, Wisconsin, Thaller says her love of astronomy began before she can even remember, about the age of 2. ''Mum said it was as soon as I could walk. She was like, 'kid, why do you care about the little lights in the sky?'. It became kind of a running joke. ''I've tried to get her interested in astronomy. She'd ask, 'well what causes the Moon phases', and as a little kid I'd get flashlights out and balls, and she's just like, 'I don't really care, I'm sorry'. ''But I just loved the stars. I was fascinated by them.'' She went to Harvard University to take her undergraduate degree in astrophysics, but found it challenging and initially intimidating. ''I was the first person in my town ever to go to Harvard. I'm from a small, rural community. That was a surprise to everybody, including me, that I got in. Harvard made it possible for me to come, with a combination of loans and scholarships and work-study programmes. ''In high school I was still doing pretty well in science classes, but then when I hit college, I was just struggling the whole time. I felt very lost, very confused. ''The professors meant well, but at that time, back in the late '80s-early '90s, you brought your notebook to class and literally wrote down what the professor was doing on the blackboard. And that was all you did. Then you went home to your dorm room. ''People have different ways of learning. And science in the past was taught, I think, in a very linear, kind of intimidating way. You know, like 'Do you have what it takes to study astrophysics?'. ''You know, if you can study anything, you can study astrophysics. It's like any other topic - I mean, how do you study enough to become a lawyer or a doctor?'' Through ''pure pig-headedness'' she stuck it out. ''I just loved astronomy, so I stayed there and suffered through it. About midway through my college career, I started to do research projects with the professors as part of my coursework and then things just lit up, because it was the practical application of these things. ''Say we want to observe these monsters called neutron stars. What sort of data do we need to take? How do we analyse the data? All of a sudden, it's your own exploration and your own questions, and working with other people.'' That carried on when she worked on her doctorate. ''A lot of people are worried that if they want to do a doctorate they have to come up with a brilliant idea all on their own. But no, you start working with a team of astronomers; you usually have one adviser, that's a professor, and they get you started on something. ''They might say, 'hey, look at this data that I have. Why don't you just start with that, and we'll talk about what you're seeing', and so you became part of a wonderful team.'' Had she ever wanted to be an astronaut? ''When I was young, yes. I went to space camp, which was run by the US Space and Rocket Centre, and I loved it. I loved astronaut training, and I had pictures of astronauts on my wall as a kid. ''And I got interested in the science behind the stars a little bit more than the actual going-to-space part of it. But I have a lot of astronaut friends, and some of the astronauts hopefully on the next Artemis missions, they're friends of mine. ''To put it kind of honestly, you know, as I got into college and grad school, I developed a fear of flying. So, you know, probably not the best thing for an astronaut to be afraid of. ''I still fly everywhere, I fly all over the world, but I'm getting better, but I'm not real comfortable in a plane. It gives me fear, especially turbulence where we bounce around. I understand everything about it, I mean turbulence isn't dangerous, but I'm getting much more calmed down about it.'' Thaller carried out much of her doctoral research on massive binary stars at the Mount Stromlo Observatory in Australia. ''These stars that are orbiting each other are sometimes 30 to 50 times the mass of the Sun. There's more of them in the southern sky than there are in the northern sky, because the centre of the galaxy appears higher in the sky in the southern sky than it does in the north, so there are actually more stars in the southern sky. ''These stars are not necessarily physically all that much bigger than the Sun, but the big thing is their mass. They have a very strong wind of particles coming off them, like winds of hot hydrogen gas, so they actually slam together a lot of molecules. ''The stars produce all of the atoms that we know but then, in these shock waves, in the winds of stars, you can get things like water molecules produced. In one of the systems I was studying, the shock wave of the winds between the stars produced enough water to fill Earth's oceans 60 times a day. ''It's making very hot, very gaseous, water, very diffuse gas, and that gets fed into the dust between the stars as we travel around the galaxy at about 700,000kmh. In the course of Earth's history, we've been around the whole galaxy about 20 times.'' Astronomers now have a sample of Asteroid Bennu, which shows how water reacted with the minerals, she says. ''It must have been part of a dwarf planet that got broken up at some point. But there was liquid water around, dissolving the minerals, which is amazing.'' Pulsars, the dead cores of stars that spin fast and emit regular bursts of electromagnetic radiation, also fascinate Thaller. ''There are some that spin a couple of hundred times a second. These are only about 30km across but with the mass of twice the Sun. That actually turns out to be twice the density of an atomic nucleus - it's the densest matter that we know of. So, pulsars are incredible monsters. ''There was an event in 2008 where there was a burst of high-energy radiation and a noticeable amount of atmosphere got blown up into space. And our magnetic field was ringing like a bell. And we were like, 'OK, what just happened?'. ''We traced it back to a little glitch - one of the pulsars had a tiny, tiny little change in the rate it was rotating. That pulsar was 50,000 light years away - a light year being about 10 trillion kilometres. We think there was a tiny shift in the crust of the pulsar, maybe about 1cm or less, and in a millisecond that produced more energy than the Sun puts out in a quarter billion years. ''We got a glancing blow of high-energy radiation from that thing. Some people wonder if such events might actually limit the lifetimes of civilisations. I mean, there are thousands, millions of pulsars all around us. ''One little bad day on a pulsar, and it takes out planets for light years.'' That potential threat to our existence is larger than from an asteroid, she says. ''The huge asteroid that took out the dinosaurs, it may have caused a huge shift in our climate but life survived that. But if you get a direct hit by one of these gamma-ray bursts, it can just strafe the atmosphere off.'' We're back to the returning-to-the-stars narrative. On a brighter note, Thaller says she has had a great visit so far. Her Ōtepoti experience kicked off with a train trip through the Taieri Gorge on a Stargazer journey operated by Dunedin Railways, Tūhura Otago Museum and the Dunedin Astronomical Society. The events allow passengers to alight at Hindon and view the universe through up-to-date telescopes in a streetlight-free area. ''I've never done anything like it,'' she says. ''This was such a unique astronomy experience. A lovely historic train took off from the station, we were served a good meal on board, and in about an hour we got to a site that had telescopes and other activities set up. The young people running the show were just wonderful - full of knowledge and energy. ''We lucked out - there were patchy clouds around, but the holes were big enough to get good views of star clusters. Mulled wine and hot chocolate on the way back, and I answered astronomy questions over the train intercom.'' For an astronomer, that sounds like a heavenly cocktail. The festival Expect the usual eclectic mixture of workshops, talks, tours and shows over the week, as more than 100 organised events are held across Dunedin until the festival closes next Sunday. A random dive into the festival programme reveals events including: ''An Introvert's Guide to Extroverts'', ''A Flying Photon'', ''Atomically Correct'' (a quantum comedy), ''Coastal Parasites: The good, the bad and the ugly'', ''Death in the Distillery: A Forensic Mystery'', ''Exploring Dunedin's Extinct Volcano'', ''Heart Science for Kids'', ''Jean Stevens and 'Blooming Impossible', ''Living Alongside Pakake'', ''The Science Behind Everyday Appliances'', ''Te Tahu-Nui-ā-Rangi (Aurora) clay tile making'', and ''Fight Like a Physicist''. • Check out the full listings at
RNZ News
4 hours ago
- RNZ News
Trump wins as Supreme Court curbs judges, but may yet lose on birthright citizenship
By Andrew Chung , Reuters The US Supreme Court in Washington, DC. Photo: AFP / KAYLA BARTKOWSKI The US Supreme Court's landmark ruling blunting a potent weapon that federal judges have used to block government policies nationwide during legal challenges was in many ways a victory for President Donald Trump, except perhaps on the very policy he is seeking to enforce. An executive order that the Republican president signed on his first day back in office in January would restrict birthright citizenship - a far-reaching plan that three federal judges, questioning its constitutionality, quickly halted nationwide through so-called "universal" injunctions. But the Supreme Court's ruling, while announcing a dramatic shift in how judges have operated for years deploying such relief, left enough room for the challengers to Trump's directive to try to prevent it from taking effect while litigation over its legality plays out. "I do not expect the president's executive order on birthright citizenship will ever go into effect," said Samuel Bray, a Notre Dame Law School professor and a prominent critic of universal injunctions whose work the court's majority cited extensively in the ruling. Trump's executive order directs federal agencies to refuse to recognise the citizenship of children born in the United States who do not have at least one parent who is an American citizen or lawful permanent resident, also called a "green card" holder. The three judges found that the order likely violates citizenship language in the US Constitution's 14th Amendment. The directive remains blocked while lower courts reconsider the scope of their injunctions, and the Supreme Court said it cannot take effect for 30 days, a window that gives the challengers time to seek further protection from those courts. The court's six conservative justices delivered the majority ruling, granting Trump's request to narrow the injunctions issued by the judges in Maryland, Washington and Massachusetts. Its three liberal members dissented. The ruling by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who Trump appointed to the court in 2020, emphasized the need to hem in the power of judges, warning against an "imperial" judiciary. Judges can provide "complete relief" only to the plaintiffs before them, Barrett wrote. That outcome was a major victory for Trump and his allies, who have repeatedly denounced judges who have impeded his agenda. It could make it easier for the administration to implement his policies, including to accelerate deportations of migrants, restrict transgender rights, curtail diversity and inclusion efforts, and downsize the federal government - many of which have tested the limits of executive power. In the birthright citizenship dispute, the ruling left open the potential for individual plaintiffs to seek relief beyond themselves through class action lawsuits targeting a policy that would upend the long-held understanding that the Constitution confers citizenship on virtually anyone born on US soil. Bray said he expects a surge of new class action cases, resulting in "class-protective" injunctions. "Given that the birthright-citizenship executive order is unconstitutional, I expect courts will grant those preliminary injunctions, and they will be affirmed on appeal," Bray said. Some of the challengers have already taken that path. Plaintiffs in the Maryland case, including expectant mothers and immigrant advocacy groups, asked the presiding judge who had issued a universal injunction to treat the case as a class action to protect all children who would be ineligible for birthright citizenship if the executive order takes effect. "I think in terms of the scope of the relief that we'll ultimately get, there is no difference," said William Powell, one of the lawyers for the Maryland plaintiffs. "We're going to be able to get protection through the class action for everyone in the country whose baby could potentially be covered by the executive order, assuming we succeed." The ruling also sidestepped a key question over whether states that bring lawsuits might need an injunction that applies beyond their borders to address their alleged harms, directing lower courts to answer it first. The challenge to Trump's directive also included 22 states, most of them Democratic-governed, who argued that the financial and administrative burdens they would face required a nationwide block on Trump's order. George Mason University constitutional law expert Ilya Somin said the practical consequences of the ruling will depend on various issues not decided so far by the Supreme Court. "As the majority recognises, states may be entitled to much broader relief than individuals or private groups," Somin said. New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin, a Democrat who helped lead the case brought in Massachusetts, disagreed with the ruling but sketched out a path forward on Friday. The ruling, Platkin said in a statement, "recognised that nationwide orders can be appropriate to protect the plaintiffs themselves from harm - which is true, and has always been true, in our case." Platkin committed to "keep challenging President Trump's flagrantly unlawful order, which strips American babies of citizenship for the first time since the Civil War" of 1861-1865. Legal experts said they expect a lot of legal maneuvering in lower courts in the weeks ahead, and the challengers still face an uphill battle. Compared to injunctions in individual cases, class actions are often harder to successfully mount. States, too, still do not know whether they have the requisite legal entitlement to sue. Trump's administration said they do not, but the court left that debate unresolved. Meanwhile, the 30-day clock is ticking. If the challengers are unsuccessful going forward, Trump's order could apply in some parts of the country, but not others. "The ruling is set to go into effect 30 days from now and leaves families in states across the country in deep uncertainty about whether their children will be born as US citizens," said Elora Mukherjee, director of Columbia Law School's immigrants' rights clinic. - Reuters
