Thanks Rational K.
I kind of feel the same way Cameron G.
Or maybe this is part of the give and take that is required to ensure that NASA’s needs are met while also giving Musk what he needs.
And there you go again with wanting to make this about politics. So you feel certain that if we could magically change all the liberal bureaucrats into conservative bureaucrats who allowed Elon to do as he wished that there would be no problems?
You raised a few good points., Unfortunately, you seriously handicapped them with the second paragraph rant that makes it look like ANYTHING the government does is messed up. which kind of ruins your credibility.
Besides, there is nothing in the article that supports the conclusion that this is about pettiness, vindictiveness, “not invented here”, etc. So your comments looks like it comes from bias
Maybe you should be an advisor to him
From another angle, Musk’s “Twitter takeover” could look like he was just trying to manipulate the share price. Think about that for a minute or two.
eh, I totally disagree. Libtard is never appropriate if you are trying to have real conversation where you’ll listen as well as you talk.
Tell me all about the conspiracies and how any of this is unique to this administration and not all of them.
I love this passage, “This administration is based on lies, attacks and vindication for those that disagree with their policies.” Did you say the same things about the Trump administration?
Why would this offend me? I was kind of wondering the same thing.
But I think it is incumbent on “We the People” to take it upon ourselves to not jump to conclusions nor blithely believe everything we hear, and to be ready to try to understand that there might be deeper issues than can be conveyed in a single two paragraph article.
Maybe that guy in “Office Space” was onto something when he designed the “Jump to Conclusions” mat.
I do respect free speech. “Bigly”.
I just wish that instead of using free speech as a weapon, or to belittle others, people would use their free speech for more constructive things.
Just finished watching SpaceX’s 49th StarLink launch, in which this particular booster returned for a successful landing for the 13th time. SpaceX has two more launches scheduled for this weekend - not as busy as the Greyhound bus terminal but closing in.
The Artemis mission was planned around the limitations of SLS and the Orion capsule, hence the “Lunar Gateway”. In defense of the planners, I think Starship caught most people by surprise. If the missions dropped Orion and were flown exclusively by Starship, the Lunar Gateway would be superfluous; however an LEO Gateway might make sense. And imagine the exploration missions to the outer planets NASA could perform with the 100 tons of payload available with Starship. Casey Handmer, who has worked for JPL, has a blog where he opines about space and his other interests. Here are two links that explore the implications of Starship:
https://caseyhandmer.wordpress.com/2021/11/17/science-upside-for-starship/
https://caseyhandmer.wordpress.com/2021/10/28/starship-is-still-not-understood/
Yep, it’s all the fault of the “left”. Nobody of a right-leaning mindset would ever even consider using government for their own devices and taking advantage of people using it.
In other words, people should use free speech if it conforms to YOUR standards…
“Libtard is never appropriate”
Post YOUR standards of what is appropriate so that we can all conform to yours…Lord knows we wouldn’t want to hurt your itty bitty wittle feewings by saying what we really feel…
Somewhat expected these days that the conspiracy theory consuming, “everything is political or agenda driven” crowd shows up on articles like this and there needs to be a push back on that nonsense using stuff like science, facts and, if those aren’t sufficient, mockery.
First, facts. NASA needs SpaceX and SpaceX needs NASA. There are billions of dollars in contracts between the two and more to come. NASA also has an obligation to the public and other stakeholders who are impacted by successful launches and very dramatically by fails.
The launchpads in proximity are an issue in Florida even as Kennedy and neighboring Space Force facilities have already gone down the environmental path in ways Texas has not.
SoaceX is NOT being picked on due to politics. They have a new and VFL (very f-ing large) bomb that either explodes all at once or in a more controlled fashion. The breakthroughs in design and performance also come with a VFL risk factor given the rule of “nothing comes for free” in physics. The explosive potential of a VFL amount of liquid methane which has a much higher energy density than liquid hydrogen… that transcends whatever imagined political nonsense one might blame these delays on.
Giant tanks of liquid methane and liquid O2 next to similarly sized tanks of H+O actually present a different scale of danger.
That’s it. Now stick to science and let the science and safety experts hash everything out so we can applaud a successful launch as soon as possible.
Yes, because “science!” and the “experts” did such a great job in handling the pandemic. /s
Oh Geez give the political crap a rest. Anything you don’t like is Biden’s fault or Trumps fault. Crap happened before them and will happen after them. Keep your politics out of aviation. So tiresome.
Laughable to see idiots like Chuck politicizing facts and prevention procedures to politics blaming Democrats ( those people who eat and drink chieldren’s blood ???) for everything. Never imagine too many ignorants believing in QAnon. And other illogical Conspiracy Theory, poor bustards at the end we should feel sorry 4 these idiots ???
I guess Putin Won ???
NASA has always see SpaceX as a competitor. SpaceX is making NASA look very bad in the world.They are doing their very best to slow SpaceX progress.
It certainly is Bull “something”
I find the reactions to the post to be understandable, but based on a post that seems to be wrong in the high order bit.
NASA has not according to the article denied launches, and Kathy Leuders is not having none of it. According to the Reuters article which itself could be expected to show some anti-spaceX bias, they are “Working together to work out how to do this”. Personally I think that just makes sense since an explosion of a star ship stack on the pad would be quite an event.
That they are in fact approaching these issues seems to suggest NASAs confidence that Starship is a reality at this point that needs to be worked into their system.
Perhaps Russ Niles should revise the post? It really is misleading.