How we could have better spent the money spent on the F-35.
The SLS costs are BS, though. If you really wanted to colonize the moon, you could actually get a lot more bang for the buck than this.
How we could have better spent the money spent on the F-35.
The SLS costs are BS, though. If you really wanted to colonize the moon, you could actually get a lot more bang for the buck than this.
It looks like Taber and Jane haven’t given up yet. But they need to give up the SLS fantasy.
I haven’t perused this article yet, but Japan has always taken the concept more seriously than we have (well, except briefly in the late seventies).
Nothing has changed in four years, except the name of the rocket.
…is scientists:
Before I go on, I should note that my objection to Professor Weinberg’s essay is the stupidity and crudeness of its argument; I largely agree with his position about funding ambitious science. In fact, it is because I agree with his position on Big Science that the rest of his essay vexes me. His good point is wrapped in a wrongheaded and poisonous generality; it’s like serving an ice-cream sundae in a bowl shaped like Andrew Cuomo’s face.
Note also Weinberg’s ignorant bashing of ISS. It’s so funny that he thinks it’s about science.
Also read Charles W. Cooke’s appropriately pitiless (as Kevin says) take down of the Neil deGrasse Tyson cult. [Note, it’s behind a paywall]
A regurtitated and unironic PAO release at the Huffington Post, UK.
I love all these references to the “most powerful rocket” ever. It’s like the agency is being run by Tim the Tool Man Taylor.
Jeff Foust reports on the new launch company’s first planned product, and wonders if there’s a market for it.
I talked to Buzz yesterday, and he’s promoting a huge social-media celebration of the event (the actual anniversary is a week from Sunday).
[Update a while later]
Jeff Foust has a piece up at The Space Review.