Why is no one talking seriously about Falcon Heavy to the moon,.... FH has the needed Delta-V to put payloads on the Lunar surface at the very least in expendable mode,.... it could put habitats and Orion in play now,.... all this could done while Starship matures.
If Nelson is so worried about safety before flying, why send people on Artemis 2? Heatshield problems. Reentry problems. Untested life support. Too expensive for test flights?
The life support system for Orion was extensively tested on the ground, as was the Apollo spacecraft, which used large vacuum chambers for testing. The heatshield problems have been understood and a valid engineering solution was found by reducing heat load by changing the reentry trajectory. Again going to the comparison to the Apollo Program, NASA flew two Saturn Vs before crew was placed onboard on Apollo 8.
@@ellieinspace You're welcome. I appreciate your perspective and also bringing in Eric to comment. I read both of his books Liftoff and Re-entry on the deck of a Holland-America cruise ship while sailing the Mediterranean seas last October and I have high regard for both of you. Thanks for all you do.
SLS is such a drain on NASA's budget, making it an obvious target for DOGE. The negotiations to agree the cancellation of SLS will test Jared's considerable skills, but I'm confident he's up to the job.
@@ross077 you don’t understand how things work. SLS isn’t a drain on NASA’s budget. It’s the reason why NASA’s budget looks like it does. If SLS goes away, nasa doesn’t just get to keep all that money. Also Issacmen and Trump have 4 years. Do you really think they believe their own crap enough to throw away their only shot at being in office when we land men on the moon? Doge is joke. Named after a meme. You ever heard of the James Webb space telescope? You know who James Webb was? The guy in isaacsmen’s chair the last time we landed on the moon. Sls needs to fix a heat shield and launch 2 rockets in 4 years. Thats it. All the work has been done and the money has been spent. He “negotiates” a cancellation and we ain’t going back to the moon buddy…
@@matthewakian2 And that's a good thing. A big military is the only reason to have a big country. If it wasn't for defense, then each state would be better off declaring independence. If world peace magically happened, then we should decentralize power and give the people more freedom. Maybe Nasa can survive as an international organization. Like the American version of the European Space Agency.
@@matthewakian2 And that's a good thing. A big military is the only reason to have a big country. If it wasn't for defense, then each state would be better off declaring independence. If world peace magically happened, then we should decentralize power and give the people more freedom. Maybe Nasa would survive as an international organization. Like the American version of the European Space Agency.
See this is the kind of "progress" that makes me feel like a change in Leadership is required to get NASA back on track. I think Jared getting to run the show is a good idea and potentially a revolutionary one in terms of getting things to move.
@@professorg8383 Both can be true, though its usually the petrochemical companies that give people the opportunity to get their beaks wet 😅. People don't need to lose jobs though in the pursuit of greater efficiency. If NASA has a fixed budget they would still be spending the same but you'd get more projects and science out the door per dollar, which if you want to go to the taxpayer and ask for more money, you'd better show some value for it else the budgets will be cut further and people will lose their jobs anyway.
Since right after Apollo NASA became burdened with keeping rocket scientists employed…Then it grew into just getting a larger piece of the budget rather than space exploration
Keeping rocket scientists employed was better than the alternative of letting those skill sets atrophy. But given the current burgeoning commercial launch industry, there is now no need for a 'jobs program', like SLS.
I can't argue against cancelling SLS due to it's expense, it does seem ludicrous to spend that much on a single launch, it seems using the Shuttle engines didn't actually save anything at all as it is costing more than the shuttle did and it was crazy expensive back when it was flying. We have been saying that SLS was too expensive several years ago and even now that it is flying the cost is far too high to be sustainable and would only allow at most one flight per year which won't get us anywhere.
@@stevej7139 you know what’s ludicrous? Spending billions to build the first manned rated moon ship, develop the whole thing, have it fly a near flawless mission, then have idiots screaming to throw it away because they need time to work on the heat shield and the tower…
@@Papershields001 I think it has more to do with the 3.5 billion dollar price tag to launch one time, starship will cost far less and do far more with each launch plus it can launch far more than at most once a year. Trying to save SLS due to the cost to develop when it's cost to fly is unsustainable is a sign of pure incompetence where money is concerned, better to rip that band aid off now than spend more money that would be better spent on something sustainable.
@@Papershields001Sunk cost is sunk. Is it the best use of future money to continue funding SLS? It might be, but I think that case needs to be presented.
@ it’s just amazing how blind yall are to how the world works. SLS isn’t SUPPOSED to be cheap. It’s supposed to be EXPENISIVE. SLS is as much a stimulus program for backward red states like Utah, Louisiana and Alabama than it is a program to build a moon rocket. We live in a capitalist society so we can’t just give money to people. But the government can give big tech contracts that employ thousands of people in senator’s and representatives districts. It’s about thousands of tech jobs in Michoud. In what bizarre world do you live in where you expect it to be cost effective? We are the richest country on earth. The program being a massive white elephant is a symptom of the machine working as designed not being broken. The rocket is done, yeah it’s expensive but it can fly once every two years and we get to have men on the moon. And by the way: this is EXACTLY how it was done with Apollo. In fact Artemis is VASTLY cheaper than Apollo. For a time Apollo took up 4% of the entire federal budget. It’s socialism hidden behind big business and so what, we listen to you and we’ve got the same system and no moon landing.
NASA's Administrator doesn't get to make that call, Congress has to also sign off on it. And that could be problematical... (It took the Augustine Commission to show the Constellation Program could *not* be done on any likely NASA budget, and SLS is kind of 'son of Constellation,' with Orion as its only surviving element.)
Think about how much extra money they are spending to stack and de-stack SLS just to get some photos. It's half ass, short term thinking like that that's getting it canceled. It's just blowing money like it doesn't matter, showing off outdated legacy technology
And while stacking IS elaborate and involved and an important step in a launch program, let's face it- it looks like just playing around to ordinary folks, and is the furthest thing from impressive. To me it must seem no more important to most than proving the engine and transmission and tires fit the car.
@jamesengland7461 yup. "oh, this is just a test fit? So you're not even done building it and have no confidence it'll all fit and just wanted to check something"
The changes coming up with the new admin will bring changes that folks will be amazed by…The blurred vision that NASA had will be come into a much sharper vision…NASA will start operating as a business rather than the over burdened bureaucracy
NASA is no business, and it couldn't do what it does if it was. One of NASA's jobs is to push technology. That's damn expensive. But go look up the wiki article on "NASA spin-offs". We literally owe much of our modern world to NASA. Oh, and the last study I saw showed every dollar we put into NASA, generated $10 in economic activity.
Good luck to Jared in dealing with NASA's very entrenched bureaucracy. That'll be the tough part of his job. Launching reliable rockets on time? - a walk in the park by comparison.
That’s why the (inspired) choice by Elon of Jared for Administrator is not enough; he needs the right support people to enable him to make a difference in allowing him to make the fundamental changes to NASA- including, fighting the antibodies that will inevitably fight back against them. We just need to make sure he’s now surrounded by (internal, NASA-) experienced, but still reform-minded, folks to help him make REAL, hard reforms NASA/America needs going forward. - Dave Huntsman
I really appreciate your ability to report on the political updates around space without showing any political bias. It shows real class. Proper news and reporting. The ground news sponsor is a nice touch too
@@mattpujol4787 Everyone wants NASA to do well. But objectively there's a lot of stuff to praise SpaceX for at the moment, and a lot to criticise NASA for right now. Reporting otherwise wouldn't be truthful. My praise was for not showing politcal bias anyway. Also, Ellie interviewed Elon and then later pointed out how damaging his social media posts could be for SpaceX in the future. That to me shows she would rather report accurately, rather than brown nose for the sake of getting future interviews.
SLS has launched once, Spacex has launched Starship 6 times. It would be interesting to see how much SLS has cost in comparison to Spacex Starship and their entire Starbase. I have my own thoughts on who has spent the most?
Starship is an empty tube. It crashed and destroyed the launch facilities because they didn't trouble themselves to add protection that rocket engineers have known you need since the fifties. How many MILLIONS of taxpayer money went down with that?! Then they crashed again. THEN they realized starship is incapable of lifting 100 tons to orbit, so they had to announce a whole new one. They don't have anything even close to a viable vehicle with life support, or even an interior. All subsidized by American tax dollars. Remember SpaceX has only turned a profit ONCE, by a small margin. They made their money on guess what? starlink. Also a money loser which only exists because of corporate welfare. Where is the market for 100 tons to orbit?! Lol. Check out the video by Smarter Every Day where he takes NASA to task about starship going to the moon. It is embarrassing. When Artemis had problems, they rolled it into the hanger and fixed it. It didn't just barely make into orbit as an empty shell. It went to the moon with a full interior, came back, and landed safely. Boy, there is a whole world of people taken in by techno ponzi grifter elon musk. Hopefully, he'll face justice one day.
Jared is an inspired pick for NASA. I wonder if he is a little sad because it will mean he won't be going to space for a while. Keep up the good work. Cheers from Alaska
Like the others commenting, thank you for using your best skills (interviewing) to help equip us all. On to a specific concern: Artemis 1 / Orion flew with LESS than a complete life aupport system. It is iniquitous to have astronauts risked on Artemis 2, where the first full-life-support testing will only then occur. Either add an extra Artemis flight, as Artemis2, where an unmanned full life support format is used. Or use a non-Orion craft for subsequent Artemis flights.
We're in a new era and 3 billion dollar launches once a year is not the way. Even without reusability the cost and frequency of legacy designs are on their way out. With Jared at the helm and DOGE involved, I can't wait to see what new approach to space travel is on the horizon.
@@robertanderson5092no they don't. Lunar gravity is so low that landing a Starship is only a matter of firing a number of thrusters at a tangent to Starship.
Damn! What a fantastic report and interview! Deeply informative, giving us a unique look deep behind the scenes of how and why things happen the way they do at NASA. I've said it before, and I'll say it again. I'm glad I found this channel.
I mean it’s already been over two years since the first unscrewed Artemis flight If Artemis truly launches again in 2026 I’m sure it will pale in comparison to starship
Great episode! Do one about X's new triple layer heat shield. Along with more in depth with Eric's Plan's when he becomes the head of NASA. Thanks again for the episode. - NOM
I always wondered, hold on, they are going to have a human rated Starship launch empty, meet up and dock with Orion in orbit around the moon, have the astronauts transfer over to the human rated Starship and have Starship land them on the moon. What's wrong with this picture?
2025 is going to be exciting in the space industry. Kudos to President Trump for thinking outside the box with Jared Isaacman's nomination. BTW, Love the new curls Ellie
Waste of money and space to pre-stack with clear chance it will be cancelled. This is Bill's out going move to insure his failing plans get pushed forward even if deemed not worth the cost. His hope by stacking now is it will be cheaper to take a chance with some launch than to tear back down after spending full assembly cost. With the heat shield issue and other cost re-tasking for a payload run may be the best option as even Bill says it is not ready for its paid for purpose and still adding cost.
The shot at 2:14 tells you all you need to know about the difference between NASA and SpaceX. I count 20 workers. SpaceX would probably have 3 for the same task.
It doesn't matter when it gets stacked though. The propellant in the srbs has a shelf life as you say but that starts when its mixed at the factory. When its stacked has nothing to do with anything with that. Apcp has a long shelf life, 18mths more isn't going to affect them. 20yrs might. Might!. That varies though. I fly that same propellent in motors that are 15yrs old or more with complete success all the time and yet to have a failure due to propellant age. Not to say i havent seen it but when ive seen issues its with apcp motors that are 30yrs old and the like. Motors under 20yrs old ive never seen one fail because of aged propellant. The rubbers should still be fine in 18mths or there's something wrong. They'll be fine. Just dont install or initiate batteries until closer to launch and it'll be good.
I'd say keep SLS just for Artemis 2, then cancel it. Starship will be able to do Artemis 3 and beyond, New Glenn and Vulcan Centaur will be great heavy lift rockets to assist the effort. Falcon Heavy will also be useful for sending hardware to the moon.
Hi. I like your presence, especially your dolphin-like smile. And at the same time you are a very good journalist. This is the most important. I follow you since you had about 30 thousand subscribers. Your content is better every day. Thank You! Greetings from Romania!
If NASA can ground test the heat shield material in the reentry conditions now, why didn't they do that before they flew it? They're not doing fail fast, rapid iteration development. They're supposed to get this right when they spend a hundred billion dollars.
Like with starliner they test every element individually, and in the case of NASA contractors, they tested every integrated element small enough to he tested. But you cannot test the entire system in some cases and that was one. They assumed off-gas would vent and not cause a pressure buildup. That assumption may have been correct based on ground expectations but wasn’t in situation. This is similar to the starliner thruster "doghouse" where every thruster individually worked fine but it fucked up when bundled together.
Hopefully Issacman will hit the ground running and quickly open the possibility of replacing as much as possible expensive moon program hardware with starship solutions.
more government agencies need people that have run/built big companies in the privet sector, to be placed in charge. this will help eliminate a lot of useless fat that stays in place "just because" it has always been that way.
Hey, I want to see the next starship launch. What is the best airport to fly into, is it An Antonio or is there something closer that has a lot of flight options?
SLS was intended to preserve the manufacturing pipeline for a vehicle that was cancelled. It took so long that it defeated its own purpose. It's chasing its own tail. Might as well as just given that money to those workers as pension, they all retired by now.
![Seungmin "그렇게, 천천히, 우리(As we are)" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kAzmhLHePqU/mqdefault.jpg)
Go to ground.news/ellieinspace an objective, data-driven way to read the news. Subscribe for 50% off the Vantage plan.
China doesn’t consider itself in a space race with USA. No matter what USA does, China just do what it plans, according to schedule
@Ellieinspace Nice face, what are your measurements
NASA Should Keep Oriof, Scrap the SLS Russia 7 2024
Why is no one talking seriously about Falcon Heavy to the moon,.... FH has the needed Delta-V to put payloads on the Lunar surface at the very least in expendable mode,.... it could put habitats and Orion in play now,.... all this could done while Starship matures.
Oh, the irony of THIS channel advertising for, "an objective, data-driven way to read the news", LOFL!
I can’t say im surprised to see Artemis 2 delayed, but I’m glad they finally publicly announced it.
I really suspect it will be delayed again sadly
If Nelson is so worried about safety before flying, why send people on Artemis 2? Heatshield problems. Reentry problems. Untested life support. Too expensive for test flights?
On top of that what can be done with this set up
The life support system for Orion was extensively tested on the ground, as was the Apollo spacecraft, which used large vacuum chambers for testing. The heatshield problems have been understood and a valid engineering solution was found by reducing heat load by changing the reentry trajectory. Again going to the comparison to the Apollo Program, NASA flew two Saturn Vs before crew was placed onboard on Apollo 8.
@matthewota3647 great! Still seems like a 1 time 1 single mission profile platform but I'm not a space nerd
Also limited rockets as it is reusing Shuttle Program parts.
That reentry video that NASA posted was terrifying
I've got to say, you're fast at reporting these stuffs. Kudos 👍
In my mind I’m not fast enough haha
Years of news training will do that to you
NASA Should Keep Oriof, ALPHA TECH Scrap the SLS Russia 7 2024
she's able to interview elon... i wouldn't be surprised she'll be talking to trump too
Thank you for this summary. I missed a majority of the live press conference.
Of course! It was a long conference, glad you found this useful
Thanks!
Wow, thank you so much!! 🎉
@@ellieinspace You're welcome. I appreciate your perspective and also bringing in Eric to comment. I read both of his books Liftoff and Re-entry on the deck of a Holland-America cruise ship while sailing the Mediterranean seas last October and I have high regard for both of you. Thanks for all you do.
SLS is such a drain on NASA's budget, making it an obvious target for DOGE.
The negotiations to agree the cancellation of SLS will test Jared's considerable skills, but I'm confident he's up to the job.
@@ross077 you don’t understand how things work. SLS isn’t a drain on NASA’s budget. It’s the reason why NASA’s budget looks like it does. If SLS goes away, nasa doesn’t just get to keep all that money. Also Issacmen and Trump have 4 years. Do you really think they believe their own crap enough to throw away their only shot at being in office when we land men on the moon? Doge is joke. Named after a meme.
You ever heard of the James Webb space telescope? You know who James Webb was? The guy in isaacsmen’s chair the last time we landed on the moon. Sls needs to fix a heat shield and launch 2 rockets in 4 years. Thats it. All the work has been done and the money has been spent. He “negotiates” a cancellation and we ain’t going back to the moon buddy…
it's funny, because NASA's budget is peanuts compared to let's say the military.
@@matthewakian2Obviously if one thing is expensive, there being another thing that is even more expensive justifies the expense of the first thing.
@@matthewakian2 And that's a good thing. A big military is the only reason to have a big country. If it wasn't for defense, then each state would be better off declaring independence. If world peace magically happened, then we should decentralize power and give the people more freedom. Maybe Nasa can survive as an international organization. Like the American version of the European Space Agency.
@@matthewakian2 And that's a good thing. A big military is the only reason to have a big country. If it wasn't for defense, then each state would be better off declaring independence.
If world peace magically happened, then we should decentralize power and give the people more freedom. Maybe Nasa would survive as an international organization. Like the American version of the European Space Agency.
Thanks!
Wow, thank you so much!
I've read both of Eric's books on SpaceX. He is an excellent author and interviews well! Thanks!
SLS is nicknamed Senate launch system for a reason
Be careful the Republicans are coming to the Senate
NASA Should Keep Oriof, ALPHA TECH Scrap the SLS Russia 7 2024
not a great look :-0 it's too bad NASA has regressed so much
See this is the kind of "progress" that makes me feel like a change in Leadership is required to get NASA back on track. I think Jared getting to run the show is a good idea and potentially a revolutionary one in terms of getting things to move.
I agree with you. Can't wait to see how NASA is shaken up once Jared takes office
I like the Eric chats! Looking forward to you snagging some Musk, Isaacman and other interviews in the new year!
I hope so too!
Great interview. Thank you for putting this together
Glad you enjoyed it!
Great interview Ellie. Eric is such a great asset.
I agree! I was glad to get his insight
NASA Should Keep Oriof, ALPHA TECH Scrap the SLS Russia 7 2024
There's going to be a lot of upset Politicians, their kickbacks are finished.
Won't happen! Trump will not defeat the Deep State.Just like he didn't do it before
Kickbacks?? Do you call tens of thousands of jobs in their states, "kickbacks" or the congressmen doing their jobs??
@@professorg8383 Yeah, 'kickbacks' was dumb. The US isn't Nigeria, but that may change...
'Pork' is the more accurate term for what SLS is.
@@professorg8383 Both can be true, though its usually the petrochemical companies that give people the opportunity to get their beaks wet 😅. People don't need to lose jobs though in the pursuit of greater efficiency. If NASA has a fixed budget they would still be spending the same but you'd get more projects and science out the door per dollar, which if you want to go to the taxpayer and ask for more money, you'd better show some value for it else the budgets will be cut further and people will lose their jobs anyway.
Nice to see a new younger administrator coming into NASA.
He’s half the age of Bill Nelson! Pretty crazy to think about!
Since right after Apollo NASA became burdened with keeping rocket scientists employed…Then it grew into just getting a larger piece of the budget rather than space exploration
So true, unfortunately
Exactly and this is the type of stuff us blue collar folks are sick of
Keeping rocket scientists employed was better than the alternative of letting those skill sets atrophy. But given the current burgeoning commercial launch industry, there is now no need for a 'jobs program', like SLS.
@@calc1657 I disagree
Yes unmanned space exploration rules no hype just Science
I can't argue against cancelling SLS due to it's expense, it does seem ludicrous to spend that much on a single launch, it seems using the Shuttle engines didn't actually save anything at all as it is costing more than the shuttle did and it was crazy expensive back when it was flying. We have been saying that SLS was too expensive several years ago and even now that it is flying the cost is far too high to be sustainable and would only allow at most one flight per year which won't get us anywhere.
@@stevej7139 you know what’s ludicrous? Spending billions to build the first manned rated moon ship, develop the whole thing, have it fly a near flawless mission, then have idiots screaming to throw it away because they need time to work on the heat shield and the tower…
@@Papershields001 I think it has more to do with the 3.5 billion dollar price tag to launch one time, starship will cost far less and do far more with each launch plus it can launch far more than at most once a year. Trying to save SLS due to the cost to develop when it's cost to fly is unsustainable is a sign of pure incompetence where money is concerned, better to rip that band aid off now than spend more money that would be better spent on something sustainable.
@@Papershields001Sunk cost is sunk. Is it the best use of future money to continue funding SLS? It might be, but I think that case needs to be presented.
@@Papershields001yes finish at all cost
@ it’s just amazing how blind yall are to how the world works. SLS isn’t SUPPOSED to be cheap. It’s supposed to be EXPENISIVE. SLS is as much a stimulus program for backward red states like Utah, Louisiana and Alabama than it is a program to build a moon rocket. We live in a capitalist society so we can’t just give money to people. But the government can give big tech contracts that employ thousands of people in senator’s and representatives districts. It’s about thousands of tech jobs in Michoud.
In what bizarre world do you live in where you expect it to be cost effective? We are the richest country on earth. The program being a massive white elephant is a symptom of the machine working as designed not being broken. The rocket is done, yeah it’s expensive but it can fly once every two years and we get to have men on the moon.
And by the way: this is EXACTLY how it was done with Apollo. In fact Artemis is VASTLY cheaper than Apollo. For a time Apollo took up 4% of the entire federal budget. It’s socialism hidden behind big business and so what, we listen to you and we’ve got the same system and no moon landing.
Thanks for all the news you brought to us Ellie.
You're awesome 👌 👍
My pleasure!!
NASA's Administrator doesn't get to make that call, Congress has to also sign off on it.
And that could be problematical...
(It took the Augustine Commission to show the Constellation Program could *not* be done on any likely NASA budget, and SLS is kind of 'son of Constellation,' with Orion as its only surviving element.)
Get rid of SLS!...COMMON SENSE!!!🙄
noooo they did already in 1969 LOL
@@Gecmajster123456 Reuse ability is the future, like it or lump it! 🤷♂
@@manuwilson4695 have never been pro-nasa, their approach to space tech is outdated and useless
NASA Should Keep Oriof, ALPHA TECH Scrap the SLS Russia 7 2024
@manuwilson4695 For anything beyond at most GEO no it really isn't.
Thanks, Ellie!
You're so welcome!
Think about how much extra money they are spending to stack and de-stack SLS just to get some photos. It's half ass, short term thinking like that that's getting it canceled.
It's just blowing money like it doesn't matter, showing off outdated legacy technology
And while stacking IS elaborate and involved and an important step in a launch program, let's face it- it looks like just playing around to ordinary folks, and is the furthest thing from impressive. To me it must seem no more important to most than proving the engine and transmission and tires fit the car.
@jamesengland7461 yup. "oh, this is just a test fit? So you're not even done building it and have no confidence it'll all fit and just wanted to check something"
@@jamesengland7461they do exactly that when they build the first examples of a finished new car model before the start of production.
It was a great interview....
Good questions...good reporting Ellie, thanks!
The changes coming up with the new admin will bring changes that folks will be amazed by…The blurred vision that NASA had will be come into a much sharper vision…NASA will start operating as a business rather than the over burdened bureaucracy
Depends what Congress allows.
Won't happen!Tthe Deep State rules the day and Trump will go along with the Deep State just like he did before!.Sorry Trumpers and Muskateers
NASA is no business, and it couldn't do what it does if it was.
One of NASA's jobs is to push technology. That's damn expensive.
But go look up the wiki article on "NASA spin-offs".
We literally owe much of our modern world to NASA.
Oh, and the last study I saw showed every dollar we put into NASA, generated $10 in economic activity.
Good luck to Jared in dealing with NASA's very entrenched bureaucracy. That'll be the tough part of his job. Launching reliable rockets on time? - a walk in the park by comparison.
That’s why the (inspired) choice by Elon of Jared for Administrator is not enough; he needs the right support people to enable him to make a difference in allowing him to make the fundamental changes to NASA- including, fighting the antibodies that will inevitably fight back against them. We just need to make sure he’s now surrounded by (internal, NASA-) experienced, but still reform-minded, folks to help him make REAL, hard reforms NASA/America needs going forward. - Dave Huntsman
@@dphuntsman Exactly.
I really appreciate your ability to report on the political updates around space without showing any political bias. It shows real class. Proper news and reporting. The ground news sponsor is a nice touch too
Really!! I don't watch a lot of this channel, but every time I pop in it's a SpaceX ad and she dogs anything NASA does....so yeah, unbiased
@@mattpujol4787 Everyone wants NASA to do well. But objectively there's a lot of stuff to praise SpaceX for at the moment, and a lot to criticise NASA for right now. Reporting otherwise wouldn't be truthful. My praise was for not showing politcal bias anyway. Also, Ellie interviewed Elon and then later pointed out how damaging his social media posts could be for SpaceX in the future. That to me shows she would rather report accurately, rather than brown nose for the sake of getting future interviews.
SLS has launched once, Spacex has launched Starship 6 times. It would be interesting to see how much SLS has cost in comparison to Spacex Starship and their entire Starbase. I have my own thoughts on who has spent the most?
Starship is an empty tube. It crashed and destroyed the launch facilities because they didn't trouble themselves to add protection that rocket engineers have known you need since the fifties. How many MILLIONS of taxpayer money went down with that?! Then they crashed again. THEN they realized starship is incapable of lifting 100 tons to orbit, so they had to announce a whole new one. They don't have anything even close to a viable vehicle with life support, or even an interior. All subsidized by American tax dollars. Remember SpaceX has only turned a profit ONCE, by a small margin. They made their money on guess what? starlink. Also a money loser which only exists because of corporate welfare. Where is the market for 100 tons to orbit?! Lol. Check out the video by Smarter Every Day where he takes NASA to task about starship going to the moon. It is embarrassing. When Artemis had problems, they rolled it into the hanger and fixed it. It didn't just barely make into orbit as an empty shell. It went to the moon with a full interior, came back, and landed safely. Boy, there is a whole world of people taken in by techno ponzi grifter elon musk. Hopefully, he'll face justice one day.
Jared is an inspired pick for NASA. I wonder if he is a little sad because it will mean he won't be going to space for a while.
Keep up the good work.
Cheers from Alaska
Thank you for Quick, accurate, reporting !
…excellent commentary, Ellie. I don’t miss any of your reports for a reason. Thank you.
Wow, I’m so glad you find value in my reporting. That means a ton!
Like the others commenting, thank you for using your best skills (interviewing) to help equip us all.
On to a specific concern: Artemis 1 / Orion flew with LESS than a complete life aupport system. It is iniquitous to have astronauts risked on Artemis 2, where the first full-life-support testing will only then occur.
Either add an extra Artemis flight, as Artemis2, where an unmanned full life support format is used. Or use a non-Orion craft for subsequent Artemis flights.
We're in a new era and 3 billion dollar launches once a year is not the way. Even without reusability the cost and frequency of legacy designs are on their way out. With Jared at the helm and DOGE involved, I can't wait to see what new approach to space travel is on the horizon.
why keep a rust bucket when u have starship...
Starship is still experimental. Berger has predicted that the first Starship to be re-flown will NOT be one of the first 50 flights.
Captain Kirk thinks those are fighting words
“Make space flight great again “😊
SpaceX has been doing that for a long time!
Crew can land in a Starship.
First they need lunar chopsticks
@@robertanderson5092no they don't. Lunar gravity is so low that landing a Starship is only a matter of firing a number of thrusters at a tangent to Starship.
Crew as in the Banana?
N.A.S.A. has fallen far from the tree.
There needs to be a comprehensive re-evaluation of our national space program.
I'm sure 2025 will bring that with DOGE and Jared taking over
Thank you for all the hard work in making these excellent videos.
Glad you like them!
I have doubts that weve been to the moon before
yikes!
The max stress test of steep reentry straight from the moon probably caused the Orion damage. Hooray for stress testing.
Damn! What a fantastic report and interview! Deeply informative, giving us a unique look deep behind the scenes of how and why things happen the way they do at NASA.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. I'm glad I found this channel.
That means so much
Thank you for supporting my work
keep doing great work Ellie!
Great video Ellie!
Thank you!!
By the time Artemis launches how far along will starship be? Multiple successful flights delivering satellites to orbit?
I mean it’s already been over two years since the first unscrewed Artemis flight
If Artemis truly launches again in 2026
I’m sure it will pale in comparison to starship
Ellie, as always, weel done!!!!!
You're the best!
Great episode!
Do one about X's new triple layer heat shield. Along with more in depth with Eric's Plan's when he becomes the head of NASA.
Thanks again for the episode.
- NOM
I always wondered, hold on, they are going to have a human rated Starship launch empty, meet up and dock with Orion in orbit around the moon, have the astronauts transfer over to the human rated Starship and have Starship land them on the moon.
What's wrong with this picture?
very good stream presenting lots of new info, thanks
Thanks for the visit
I was glad to hear that Jared is going to be the NASA administrator. Success breeds success.
I would still want a test of the most risky part of a crewed flight.
I agree. They are brave souls...
Really like your long form interviews and perspective!
that's what I do best! (I think) thank you, I really appreciate my guests agreeing to come on the show
how you can " return " if you never been there before ?
Your gut feelings don't count.
cancel the SLS tax monster NOW! Do the right thing for the American taxpayers.
yes, it is quite ridiculous how much money it's already drained
2025 is going to be exciting in the space industry. Kudos to President Trump for thinking outside the box with Jared Isaacman's nomination. BTW, Love the new curls Ellie
Super good and very informative interview. Much appreciated. Thanks.
Glad it was helpful!
Good video Ellie. Thanks to you and Eric. Have a good weekend.
Thank you! You too! Appreciate your viewership
Thanks E.. Happy Xmas.
Happy holidays!
Greetings from Temple, Texas, USA!
Yee Haw~!
we have no lander......... someone help me... how do we land ????
Starship HLS
Still in dev
I hope so, the cost per flight of this is horrendous, the lander should be moved to the starship asap
Thank you for validating the thoughts and feelings that I had while watching that news conference.
I'm so glad I wasn't alone!
Waste of money and space to pre-stack with clear chance it will be cancelled. This is Bill's out going move to insure his failing plans get pushed forward even if deemed not worth the cost. His hope by stacking now is it will be cheaper to take a chance with some launch than to tear back down after spending full assembly cost. With the heat shield issue and other cost re-tasking for a payload run may be the best option as even Bill says it is not ready for its paid for purpose and still adding cost.
Eric rocks!
His reporting is top notch
No moon landing? What a shock!😂
The shot at 2:14 tells you all you need to know about the difference between NASA and SpaceX. I count 20 workers. SpaceX would probably have 3 for the same task.
The confirmation hearings with Jared will be interesting. Hopefully there are no stumbling blocks in the senate.
Maybe you will live stream them?
Go Ellie!
It doesn't matter when it gets stacked though. The propellant in the srbs has a shelf life as you say but that starts when its mixed at the factory. When its stacked has nothing to do with anything with that. Apcp has a long shelf life, 18mths more isn't going to affect them. 20yrs might. Might!. That varies though. I fly that same propellent in motors that are 15yrs old or more with complete success all the time and yet to have a failure due to propellant age. Not to say i havent seen it but when ive seen issues its with apcp motors that are 30yrs old and the like. Motors under 20yrs old ive never seen one fail because of aged propellant. The rubbers should still be fine in 18mths or there's something wrong. They'll be fine. Just dont install or initiate batteries until closer to launch and it'll be good.
I worked it...the pitting was not that bad.
I'd say keep SLS just for Artemis 2, then cancel it. Starship will be able to do Artemis 3 and beyond, New Glenn and Vulcan Centaur will be great heavy lift rockets to assist the effort. Falcon Heavy will also be useful for sending hardware to the moon.
They can actually test the heat shield material under those conditions.
No more “Cost Plus” contracts!!! I love 💕 your new look…;-)
Yes! Thank you!
NO NO NO YOU DONT CANCEL!!!
YOU REPURPOSE
Thanks Ellie! Artemis is looking like it's logo, chopped off from the bottom.
SpaceX: IFT-6
NASA: We put point on top!
Just bin it already - and Starliner - find a new supplier who is capable of achieving goals and not making excuses.
Ellie is the best
Wow, thank you !
Hi. I like your presence, especially your dolphin-like smile. And at the same time you are a very good journalist. This is the most important.
I follow you since you had about 30 thousand subscribers. Your content is better every day. Thank You!
Greetings from Romania!
SLS is gonna probably get cut
FYI - there have been many landings on the moon with a liquid fueled rocket, just not many with cryogenic fuel.
If NASA can ground test the heat shield material in the reentry conditions now, why didn't they do that before they flew it? They're not doing fail fast, rapid iteration development. They're supposed to get this right when they spend a hundred billion dollars.
Like with starliner they test every element individually, and in the case of NASA contractors, they tested every integrated element small enough to he tested.
But you cannot test the entire system in some cases and that was one. They assumed off-gas would vent and not cause a pressure buildup. That assumption may have been correct based on ground expectations but wasn’t in situation.
This is similar to the starliner thruster "doghouse" where every thruster individually worked fine but it fucked up when bundled together.
Another great report, Ellie. Space is the one place to turn for a hopeful future!
I think so too! There is so much going on , I will never be out of a job!
It’s really hard to get excited about this Artemis Program. The delays suck and I don’t care about Artemis anymore.
I think most people share that sentiment
Hopefully Issacman will hit the ground running and quickly open the possibility of replacing as much as possible expensive moon program hardware with starship solutions.
Why aren't they using 1960's heat shields?
re entry must faster. google is your friend
Nice set props.😊
Thanks 😁
you should add in title or thumbnail that this video features Eric. it'll get more attention
Doesn't starship make Orion obsolete? What about setting Orion (or a dragon capsule) on top of a superheavy with a custom 2nd stage?
Ellie did you ever read Jay Barbree book about his covering the early space program?
It had a flawless first flight.
the flight wasn't flawless. it wasn't supposed to be, it's a test flight to find faults. and the launch tower was very badly damaged.
more government agencies need people that have run/built big companies in the privet sector, to be placed in charge. this will help eliminate a lot of useless fat that stays in place "just because" it has always been that way.
Hey, I want to see the next starship launch. What is the best airport to fly into, is it An Antonio or is there something closer that has a lot of flight options?
Brownsville or Harlingen, rent a car and you'll be less than. na hour drive from Starbase
The time has come to cut SLS.
SLS was intended to preserve the manufacturing pipeline for a vehicle that was cancelled. It took so long that it defeated its own purpose. It's chasing its own tail. Might as well as just given that money to those workers as pension, they all retired by now.
Quickly becoming one of my Favorite channels :)
A reusable heatshield would be dope!
That and retrograde burns
Nice job Ellie. Hope you can continue to have regular updates with Eric as America unleashes their turbo charged commercial space program.
He really is a great source of info!
No, that is not how that works. SLS and Orion are linked. If you take one out, the other will not be far behind it.