Scott Pace gave an important speech that is sure to upset many in the international space community at the Galloway Symposium a couple weeks ago. Laura Montgomery comments.
Speaking of Henry Hertzfeld, every time I see him, for over a couple decades now, we argue about the viability of reducing the cost of launch through reusability of rockets. I wonder what he’s thinking these days?
Now he’ll have to wait until January to be confirmed as NASA administrator, and it will be a squeaker because politics. And WTF is wrong with Rubio?
I haven’t seen everything, so I can’t say for sure that this is the stupidest, most ignorant take on it, but it will do until something dumber comes along.
[Update a few minutes later]
Meanwhile, a much smarter take from Sarah Cruddas.
[Monday-morning update]
Aaaaand here’s a rewriting of space history from Jason Rhian. Too busy with conference to fisk it, but it needs it badly.
[Bumped]
Another successful launch today, historic in that it’s the first reuse of the vehicle for a NASA payload, and the 20th successful landing. It also indicates that LC-40 is back in business after the explosion last year, and it’s the 17th launch of the year for them, a new record. There will probably be one more this year, the Iridium Next flight out of Vandenberg in a few days. And yesterday, they opened up applications for media credential for the Falcon Heavy launch out of LC-39A, next month.
[Update a few minutes later]
As for Blue Origin, get a dummy’s-eye view of this week’s flight of Mannequin Skywalker.
The UK may not be militarily prepared for it.
You don’t say. Of course, they’re not even doing a very good job dealing with the Muslim one.
Eric Berger’s take on today’s signing of the NASA directive by Trump.
I hate the phrase “space exploration.”
[Update a while later]
Bob Zimmerman isn’t impressed.
Short answer, yes, but only because he doesn’t plan to land.
This could be a momentous week for them. It looks like the number of flights this year will be 18. But a pad that can do a launch a week can do fifty flights a year, all by itself.
[Update a while later]
It’s also a big week for Rocket Lab, and Blue Origin. While I’m sure they’d like to get into business as soon as possible, I can’t help but think there’s a little extra pressure for Blue to fly the new New Shepard ahead of the suborbital conference next week in Colorado. They’re clearly now the leader in that market.
[Update a few minutes later]
Rocket Lab has scrubbed, and Doug Messier (who could use some financial support) has that and other stories, including a solution to the mystery of who Space Adventures was going to fly around the moon.
[Noon PST update]
Blue has scrubbed for the day as well, no word why yet.
A description of Andy Weir’s lunar settlement.
This is hilarious. Muilenburg thinks (or at least claims to think) that Boeing is going to beat SpaceX to Mars. With SLS.
Do it
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) December 7, 2017
[Update a while later]
Boeing also isn’t going to land a rocket on Mars without near total funding from NASA, which has already paid more than $10 billion for development of the SLS and has no actual funding to implement a humans-to-Mars exploration plan. SpaceX will also need some government funding if it is to develop its “Big Falcon Rocket” to reach Mars, but Musk has laid out plans for commercial applications of his launch system that could offset some of its cost. (The SLS rocket has no known customers aside from NASA).
What is particularly puzzling to us is why Boeing and SpaceX are arguing about Mars. These two companies, who compete directly for NASA and other government contracts, are in a far more immediate and real race to reach the launch pad in the commercial crew competition. NASA has had to rely on Russia to get its astronauts to the International Space Station since the space shuttle’s retirement in 2011. Both Boeing and SpaceX are building capsules that will launch crews from Florida.
The companies have both seen slips in their schedules for the first crewed flights. They have launch dates now set for 2018, but there is a general expectation that further delays are likely—both due to development problems and changing requirements from NASA. Regardless, the company that eventually breaks NASA’s Russian dependence will win a public relations boon beyond compare for an aerospace company.
“Do it,” we say to Dennis and Elon.
Indeed.