SpaceX's Starship explodes on the ground during a routine test
A SpaceX Starship vehicle has exploded yet again, and this time, it happened before it even took off. NASASpaceflight has captured the event in a livestream, wherein you can see the spacecraft (Ship 36) suddenly explode into a fireball after the company tested its forward flap and just before it was supposed to conduct a static fire test. The company said on X that on June 19 at approximately 12AM Eastern time, the Starship it was preparing for its 10th flight test "experienced a major anomaly" while it was on a stand in its Starbase, Texas facility.
Since SpaceX maintained a safety clear area around the vehicle, all its personnel were safe and accounted for. It also said that there's no danger to nearby residents, but it's asking people not to approach the area. According to local authorities, the explosion happened due to a "catastrophic failure." No injuries have been reported, and investigation is already underway to determine the root cause of the incident.
Starship is the super-heavy-lift launch vehicle SpaceX is developing for bigger launches with more payload and for missions heading farther than low Earth orbit, such as to the moon and to Mars. Based on its most recent tests, however, it's far from ready. During its seventh and eighth flights, its second stage, which is known as the "Ship," exploded during ascent. It was the Ship that exploded on Wednesday night. The second stage managed to reach space during its ninth test flight in May, but SpaceX lost contact with it and wasn't able to achieve a controlled splashdown into the ocean. SpaceX also lost contact with its Super Heavy booster stage upon re-entry, and it went through a "rapid unscheduled disassembly" six minutes after launch.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Ford, GM battery tech battle intensifies as Michigan plant faces political headwinds
The electric vehicle fight between rivals Ford Motor Co. and General Motors is turning bitter — and a politically fraught battery factory in Michigan is the latest battleground. Even as EV sales fall far short of expectations for now, Detroit automakers are racing for battery supremacy in hopes of locking up market share for electric vehicles, which are still widely believed to be the future of the industry. The latest leg of the battery supply chain race is all about affordability, and that's where Ford's BlueOval Battery Park in Marshall, Mich., comes into play. The $2.5 billion factory is being geared up to launch production next year of lower-cost lithium iron phosphate (LFP) batteries, a pillar of the automaker's strategy to expand market share with more affordable EVs. But the plant is a lightning rod for controversy because Ford is licensing technology from Chinese battery behemoth CATL. The first-of-its-kind deal, announced in 2023, was structured in a way that would allow the factory to receive production tax credits under the Biden-led Inflation Reduction Act. That is, until lawmakers sought to change the rules. Future Product Find our what powertrains, redesigns and freshenings are planned for the next four years. View the list Brand future product timelines A proposed budget bill by the U.S. House would make the factory ineligible for the subsidy and 'imperils' the project and its 1,700 jobs, Ford Executive Chairman Bill Ford said at the Mackinac Policy Conference in May. The plant — a key economic development project for Gov. Gretchen Whitmer — has been targeted by anti-China politicians and 'not in my backyard' local activists from the outset, but Bill Ford told reporters on the sidelines of the conference that industry competitors are now piling on. Sign up for the quarterly Automotive News U.S. Sales report to get data and news sent to your inbox as soon as it's compiled. 'We do know that others in our industry are trying to submarine it to hurt us,' Ford said. 'That's just sour grapes, frankly.' Ford stopped short of naming names, but four people familiar with the matter told Automotive News affiliate Crain's Detroit Business that GM is behind lobbying efforts for tighter rules around 'foreign entities of concern' and language in the budget bill that targets licensing agreements such as the Ford-CATL deal in Marshall. Ford views it as an attack by its longtime rival. To GM, it's nothing personal, just a bid to shore up its business strategies. The behind-the-scenes battery feud comes as automakers look to outdo each other through 'made in the USA' marketing campaigns amid Trump tariffs and pressure to increase U.S. production. While Ford boasts an industry-leading final assembly footprint in the U.S., its business with CATL in Marshall is a political vulnerability. A GM source familiar with its lobbying activity said the company's support of the tighter restrictions on business ties to China is about ensuring a level playing field. GM officials have touted battery investments in North America and the automaker's partnerships with battery manufacturers in allied countries, such as South Korea's LG Energy Solution. 'GM has been investing in a resilient critical minerals and battery supply chain to support American innovation, manufacturing and economic security,' GM spokeswoman Liz Winter said in an email to Crain's. The company declined to comment on specific lobbying efforts. Other automakers have not pushed for the tighter controls on EV production incentives like GM has, the sources told Crain's. Stellantis and Toyota Motor North America, which have been slower in their electrification approaches, declined to comment about their stance on the proposed rule changes. GM is, by far, the biggest spender among automotive companies on Capitol Hill this year, racking up a record $8.2 million in lobbying expenditures in the first quarter, according to Open Secrets, which compiles online government records. That's more than the company has spent on lobbying in a single quarter since recordkeeping started in 1998, and it's more than six times that of the next highest-spending automaker, Toyota. While GM has sought to build out a battery supply chain not dependent on China, the automaker has previously explored options to procure CATL battery technology in the U.S. GM had considered setting up a plant with CATL in Illinois mirroring the Ford-CATL licensing deal, according to two people who were involved in the talks, but it was scrapped in 2023 after the political backlash from the Ford-CATL plant in Marshall. GM declined to comment on the previously unreported project or about talks with CATL. The Alliance for Automotive Innovation, the trade group representing major auto companies including the Detroit 3, has been mum about the proposed legislation to tighten restrictions on EV incentives even though it has spoken regularly on other major issues including tariffs and emission rules. The group did not respond to requests for comment. The House bill must first be reconciled by the Senate before it is signed into law. The Senate is weighing even more dramatic rollbacks of EV tax credits, according to text from the Senate Finance Committee. U.S. Rep. John Moolenaar, R-Mich., who represents Michigan's 2nd District, said he is pleased to see his 'No Gotion' bill advance in the House budget, referring to the controversial Chinese battery manufacturer planning a factory near Big Rapids, Mich. Moolenaar said any project with ties to China is concerning, including the Ford battery plant in Marshall. 'I've been very clear. I am a strong supporter of Ford,' Moolenaar said. 'I do think the relationship with CATL is problematic because CATL has been proven to work with Chinese military companies and their supply chain is also connected to the CCP's (Chinese Communist Party) genocide of Uyghurs.' That Ford would stick by its partnership with CATL despite years of political blowback — and that a crosstown competitor would also take aim at the project — underscores just how much of a competitive advantage it could be. Nickel-manganese-cobalt, or NMC, is the predominant chemistry powering EVs on the road today. However, the batteries are costly and connected to a troublesome supply chain, with materials sourced and refined in countries such as China and the Congo. LFP batteries do not contain nickel or cobalt and thus are 20 to 30 percent less costly to produce than NMC batteries. Coupled with an up to $45 per kilowatt-hour subsidy as allowed for in the Inflation Reduction Act, Ford's plant in Marshall is set to produce batteries that are hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars cheaper than those of competitors. LFP is largely seen as an interim solution on the way to superior technology, such as lithium manganese rich (LMR) batteries. Ford and GM each announced last month LMR breakthroughs and plans to go to market with the technology by the end of the decade. Until then, it's a race for market share with current technologies. LFP had long been ignored by many in the industry because of its power capacity and range constraints, but tech advancements have vastly improved energy density in recent years. GM is reportedly working with South Korean battery makers LG and Samsung SDI to produce LFP batteries in the U.S. as well. But CATL is leagues above the competition. 'Where CATL is much more superior is the fact that they can eke out more efficiency from that same size battery versus anyone else in the market,' said Tu Le, founder of consultant Sino Auto Insights. 'They have much more scale, and they are the leaders in this particular chemistry.' That's why outside of the U.S., CATL's client roll is a who's who of the automotive industry. Almost all the major automakers doing business in China, including GM, partner with CATL on EVs in the Far East. 'So why wouldn't it make sense for Ford to partner with them in Marshall, outside of politics?' Le said. 'They're the only game in town at that price, at that quality level, at that level of innovation. The Koreans and the Japanese are good at using batteries that need a lot of cobalt, need a lot of nickel, and really drive the price of the vehicles much higher.' At the root of the Ford-GM divergence in battery strategy appears to be a difference in ideology. Ford CEO Jim Farley, who has called China the industry's greatest threat, has leaned into the competition by seeking to learn from the Chinese. To gain access to the lucrative China market in the early 1980s, Detroit automakers were forced to partner with Chinese companies, which eventually hoovered up the manufacturing know-how of the West to set the foundation for their EV dominance today. As Ford sees it, a CATL partnership is about more than cheap batteries; it's also about soaking up the Chinese expertise to become EV industry leaders. GM is striving for that same outcome, but through different means. CEO Mary Barra has downplayed China's supposed tech prowess and indicated that lower costs, driven by government subsidies, are the biggest advantage of Chinese EV companies. 'We're scaling U.S. production, securing a resilient North American supply chain, and advancing technology to drive down costs and compete globally,' Kurt Kelty, vice president of battery, propulsion and sustainability for GM, said in a recent blog post. At the Mackinac Policy Conference, Bill Ford said it is 'unfair' for politicians to change the rules after the investment has been committed. Construction on the Marshall plant, which was scaled back last year, is about 60 percent complete, and manufacturing equipment is set to arrive and be installed this summer, according to the company. Whether production lines will be powered with CATL technology and receive government subsidies remains to be decided by lawmakers. Said Moolenaar: 'As a business strategy, relying on China creates tremendous vulnerabilities.' Have an opinion about this story? Tell us about it and we may publish it in print. Click here to submit a letter to the editor. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
32 minutes ago
- Yahoo
'We Know For A Fact It's Not AI,' Experts Explain Slowdown In White Collar Hiring
For the past two years, hiring in professional and business services roles— more commonly referred to as "white collar" jobs— has been slow. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that in May, hiring in the sector declined by 0.1%. Economists told CNBC that the shrinkage was not because of AI, like many people assume, but because of structural issues in the economy. "We know for a fact that it's not AI," Roosevelt Institute director Alí Bustamante said. Don't Miss: Maker of the $60,000 foldable home has 3 factory buildings, 600+ houses built, and big plans to solve housing — Peter Thiel turned $1,700 into $5 billion—now accredited investors are eyeing this software company with similar breakout potential. Learn how you can Cory Stahle, an economist at Indeed, agrees. "This is more of an economic story and less of an AI disruption story, at least so far," told CNBC. Experts point to the fact that the decline in job creation has been an issue for several years, and began in a time when AI technology wasn't all that effective, as the primary reason that AI isn't behind the slowdown, according to CNBC. Additionally, Stahle told CNBC that the technology is still in its early stages and can't yet execute certain tasks without human intervention. A 2024 report by Indeed found that AI is more likely to support white collar workers than to replace them. Of the 2,800 skills evaluated in the report, only 28.5% were deemed fully replaceable by generative AI, and only if the technology improved quite a bit. Meanwhile, 68.7% of the work skills were deemed "very unlikely" or "unlikely" to be replaced by generative AI, as they require too much of a human touch. Trending: Maximize saving for your retirement and cut down on taxes: . "We might get to a point where [AI replaces human workers], but right now, that's not necessarily looking like it's a big factor," Stahle told CNBC. In fact, the World Economic Forum's Future of Jobs Report 2025 forecasts that AI will create 170 million new jobs by 2030. That number amounts to 14% of total current employment, and would go a long way in offsetting the 92 million jobs that could be displaced by AI. Stahle urges white collar workers whose skills may overlap with AI and who could potentially be displaced by it to learn how to use the technology to stay ahead. "Certainly, jobs are going to transform," he told CNBC. "I'm not going to downplay the potential impacts of AI." Read Next: Here's what Americans think you need to be considered wealthy. These five entrepreneurs are worth $223 billion – Image: Shutterstock Up Next: Transform your trading with Benzinga Edge's one-of-a-kind market trade ideas and tools. Click now to access unique insights that can set you ahead in today's competitive market. Get the latest stock analysis from Benzinga? APPLE (AAPL): Free Stock Analysis Report TESLA (TSLA): Free Stock Analysis Report This article 'We Know For A Fact It's Not AI,' Experts Explain Slowdown In White Collar Hiring originally appeared on © 2025 Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved. Sign in to access your portfolio
CNET
35 minutes ago
- CNET
BenQ GP520 Projector Review: Big Bright Picture, Itty Bitty Box
7.8 / 10 SCORE BenQ GP520 $1,499 at Amazon Pros Highly accurate, lifelike color Lots of light Great size Cons Contrast ratio is below average No zoom BenQ GP520 7.8/10 CNET Score $1,499 at Amazon Since the introduction of HDR, movies and TV shows have gotten brighter and more colorful, and TVs and projectors are doing the same to take advantage of this enhanced content. BenQ's GP520 is a compact, 4K projector with colors that are fantastically lifelike and accurate -- which is quite an achievement given how bright it is. The GP520 has Google TV built in, and its size should let it fit just about everywhere. Notably, it bucks the current trend of gimbal stands by offering an optional stand that lets you place and position it just about anywhere. While the GP520's contrast ratio isn't particularly good, the picture quality is still impressive. Overall, the BenQGP520 is a great projector in a fairly tiny package. Specs and such Geoffrey Morrison/CNET Resolution: 4K HDR-compatible: Yes 4K-compatible: Yes Lumens spec: 2,600 Zoom: No Lens shift: No LED life (Normal mode): 30,000 hours (ECO mode) Despite its size, the GP520 has a fairly standard set of specs for a projector in this price range. There's 4K resolution and HDR compatibility, but there's no zoom or lens shift. BenQ's own HT2060, which is only 1080p yet cheaper, has both. On the other hand, the similarly priced JMGO N1 Ultra and Xgimi Horizon S Max are both 4K but also lack zoom. BenQ's marketing suggests it doesn't expect the GP520 to be permanently mounted, nor paired with a dedicated screen, so the lack of zoom and lens shift is probably not a huge deal. Rated at 2,600 lumens, I measured 1,258 in its most accurate Cinema mode. This puts it right in the same ballpark as the JMGO, Xgimi and Anker Nebula Cosmos 4K SE. In its less accurate, and very-green Bright mode, I measured an eye-watering 2,166. This is a very bright projector. The contrast ratio, however, is below average at 369:1. That's not great, but it is in line with many of the brighter, 4K projectors I've reviewed in the last few years. The aforementioned Anker was 232:1, for example, while the more expensive Xgimi Horizon Ultra only managed 316:1. Nearly all projectors in this price range, other than Epson, use TI's DLP chips, and there are only a few variations for home projector use. So it's not too surprising to see them perform similarly in this metric. Like many new projectors, the GP520 has some automatic setup features to adjust color and keystone based on position and wall color. These features, in any projector, will reduce the image quality. I acknowledge that they can make setup easier and faster for people unfamiliar with projectors, especially if the projector is regularly moved between rooms. They're here if you want to use them, though spending a few minutes positioning the projector correctly will result in a better image. Connections Geoffrey Morrison/CNET HDMI inputs: 2 USB port: 3 (1 USB-C, 1 USB-A, 1 USB-A for service) Audio output: eARC, 3.5,mm headphone output Internet: Wireless Remote: Not backlit Two HDMI inputs seem like the right number for a projector like this. It's not that much of a stretch to assume most people might have two sources, like an Xbox and a PlayStation. If you'd prefer a different streaming service instead of the built-in Google, there's a USB connection on the back to power a streaming stick. There's also eARC if you want to send the audio back to a soundbar or receiver. Using external speakers is always a good idea, though I imagine the GP520 will be used on its own more often than not. To that end, there are two 12-watt speakers that sound quite good. Well, quite good considering the size of the box they're in. They play loud enough that you can understand dialogue, though given their physical restrictions, they don't have much bass. Picture quality comparisons JMGO N1 Ultra Xgimi Horizon S Max The JMGO N1 Ultra, Xgimi Horizon S Max and BenQ GP520 are three closely matched projectors. They're all 4K, similarly sized and equivalently priced -- the JMGO is $100 cheaper than the GP520, while the Xgimi is around $400 more. Both the JMGO and Xgimi are on gimbals, while the BenQ can instead be mounted to a stand in several configurations. I connected them all to an HDMI distribution amplifier and watched the same content on all three at the same time, side-by-side, on a 1.0-gain screen. Geoffrey Morrison/CNET Despite a wide discrepancy of claimed brightness -- JMGO's 4,000 lumens, Xgimi's 3,100 and BenQ's (closer) 2,600 -- they all measured comparably, and picture quality was similar, too. They're all bright, highly detailed and have reasonably accurate color. There's no "bad" option, but their differences do make for an interesting comparison. For instance, in their most accurate modes, technically, the Xgimi is very slightly the brightest at 1,300 lumens. The BenQ manages nearly the same brightness, just 42 lumens less, but is more accurate. It's worth noting that the BenQ is capable of more light than the Xgimi in their brightest modes. While the differences in brightness between the three aren't obvious side by side, their differences in color definitely are. The various mounting possibilities for the GP520. The stand and mount are sold separately. BenQ The BenQ is a very accurate projector. Skin tones especially look noticeably better on the BenQ compared to the others. The Xgimi is close, but many colors look a little off, including Caucasian skin tones, which look a little pasty. The JMGO is even farther from accurate, with a slightly cooler color temperature and more oversaturated colors. On their own, the JMGO and Xgimi look pleasing enough, but the more accurate a display is, the more lifelike it looks, and the BenQ has that advantage here. Where it stumbles a bit is with contrast. It has the lowest of these three, and that results in an image that, while not washed out, does look less punchy than the JMGO's 926:1. Is it a huge difference? No, but it is noticeable. Despite being less accurate and very slightly dimmer, the eye gets drawn toward the JMGO because of that higher contrast ratio. Each definitely has its strengths and weaknesses, and there's no wrong answer here. That said, between the three, I think I'd still choose the GP520 because its color accuracy does lend a more natural look. Bitty box The blue ring around the lens is quite stylish. Geoffrey Morrison/CNET Given my tepid response to the home theater-specific W2720i, it's probably a surprise (to BenQ, almost certainly) that I like the GP520 far more despite worse performance in the most important aspect of picture quality: contrast ratio. That largely comes down to intention and price. Being a projector designed for a dedicated theater, I had higher expectations for the W2720i, especially since it cost $2,000. The GP520 costs 30% less, is brighter and still looks great. It's also far smaller. Vastly different intentions, for sure, but assuming it fits in my room (remember, no zoom), I'd pick the GP520 over the W2720i. Though honestly, if fit wasn't an issue, I'd still get the short-throw X500i over both. Looking outside of BenQ, it's a little harder to say. The excellent color accuracy really sets the GP520 apart compared to the JMGO and Xgimi, both of which have roughly similar size, intent and overall performance. I didn't even bother comparing the GP520 to the Anker Cosmos 4K SE, which is basically the same price, since that projector has worse color and contrast. The BenQ's mediocre contrast ratio is a bit of a bummer, but in this class of projector, it's rare to find one with a good contrast ratio. The JMGO is the highest of these four projectors, and it's just barely above average for what I've measured. So the GP520 is bright, has great color, sounds good and is a great size. It's a very good, though not quite great, projector that will easily fit in a lot of spaces. It's a bright box of lovely colors.
