NASA declared "No Lunar Starship landing" but SpaceX just shocked NASA with new HLS Starship design

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 27 сен 2024
  • NASA declared "No Lunar Starship landing" but SpaceX just shocked NASA with new HLS Starship design
    1, Sources of music
    The-Doctor-main-version
    2, Sources of images & videos
    Caelan Animation: / caelan55
    SpaceXvision: / spacexvision
    TijnM_3DAnimations : / m_tijn
    TijnM: / @tijn_m
    velin3d: / velin3d
    ErcX: / ercxspace
    / ercxspace
    LabPadre: / labpadre
    / labpadre
    StarshipGazer: / starshipgazer
    / starshipgazer
    Kevin Randolph: / cosmicalchief
    WAI: / @whataboutit
    SpaceX: / @spacex
    Stanley Creative: / @stanleycreative
    Astrolab: www.youtube.co...
    Evan Karen: / @evankaren
    TheSpaceEngineer: / mcrs987
    DeepSpaceCourier: / @deepspacecourier4224
    iamVisual: / @iamvisualvfx
    Christian Debney: / @christiandebney1989
    ErcX Space: / @ercxspace
    Canadian Space Agency: / @canadianspaceagency
    ACTUSPACEX: / @actuspacex6995
    C-bass Productions: / @cbassproductions
    @InfographicTony: / infographictony
    NASA Goddard: / @nasagoddard
    NASA: / @nasa
    starship.mobile.my3ideas.com: starship.mobil...
    THELONELYCAT: www.youtube.co...
    Tamás Török/@tomket7: / @tomket7
    Everyday Astronaut: / @everydayastronaut
    Starbase Surfer: / cnunezimages
    Elon Musk: / elonmusk
    Ryan Hansen Space: / @ryanhansenspace
    Trevor Mahlmann: / trevormahlmann
    THELONELYCAT: / @thelonelycat
    ==========
    NASA declared "No Lunar Starship landing" but SpaceX just shocked NASA with new HLS Starship design
    NASA has recently announced a substantial alteration to its lunar exploration agenda: No Lunar Starship Landing!
    This has raised concerns for the future of SpaceX's ambitious endeavors.
    Is SpaceX in big trouble?
    Stay tuned as we dive into this problem and more in this episode of Alpha Tech!
    The south pole of the moon is a stunning place. Towering mountains are bathed in perpetual sunshine, and the lunar dust, fine as powder, gleams in unfiltered light. Plunging craters exist in permanent shadow and hide pockets of ice in their gray rock, the water frozen and undisturbed for as long as three billion years.
    Here, somewhere along this silent terrain, NASA wants to land a new crew of astronauts. Like those who came before, these visitors will suit up and go for a walk, their bodies bouncing in the low gravity.
    But, that lunar stroll won't happen anytime soon, it could be delayed longer.
    Speaking at an Aug. 8 briefing at the Kennedy Space Center, Jim Free, NASA associate administrator for exploration systems development, said the Artemis 3 mission still has a formal launch date of December 2025 but that he was monitoring potential delays in hardware needed for the mission.
    NASA declared "No Lunar Starship landing" but SpaceX just shocked NASA with new HLS Starship design

Комментарии • 1,2 тыс.

  • @LightWingStudios
    @LightWingStudios Год назад +36

    Musk will go to the Moon when he is ready and NASA can't do a thing about it.

    • @scottwendt9575
      @scottwendt9575 10 месяцев назад

      He and a fellow billionaire may very well beat NASA to the next human circumlunar trip. Artemis is supposed to carry 4 crew toward the end of 2024, but “Dear Moon” could fly soon as well carrying 9 civilians from around the globe on a trip designed to inspire artists. It is an amazing thought that we could have a K-Pop star and Tim Dodd, “The Everyday Astronaut,” live streaming from above the surface of the Moon while NASA is still trying to calculate the maximum intersectionality they can get out of each seat on SLS. Imagine if Musk even beat NASA in completing their prized DEI checklist!

    • @jaybodner4189
      @jaybodner4189 9 месяцев назад +1

      Hello 'Tard...NASA has BEEN to the moon!
      Why do you challenge?? Why can't WE work together for the common GOAL of getting BACK to the moon together!!

    • @larrysorenson4789
      @larrysorenson4789 8 месяцев назад

      The corrupt US government could turn off SpaceX like a light switch.

    • @bf8088
      @bf8088 4 месяца назад

      MUSK MAY HAVE TO BUY AN ISLAND AND START A NEW COUNTRY BECAUSE
      NASA COULD STOP LAUNCHES, WHICH NASA HAS DONE IN THE PAST.
      NASA SHOULD BE REDONE AS NASA ARE A BUNCH OF MURDERERS

    • @WalterKazban
      @WalterKazban Месяц назад +1

      But they will try to stop SPACE X..

  • @scottwendt9575
    @scottwendt9575 Год назад +256

    Of course, NASA and Boeing can’t afford to allow SpaceX to show Moon Missions can be more affordable. The grifting of billions of taxpayer funds was exposed by the commercial Crew program where Boeing continues to get paid for cost overruns on a crew capsule that still hasn’t delivered humans to the ISS. And now, with the cost of each launch of SLS estimated at $2,500,000,000 NASA and their Boeing pals can’t allow SpaceX to build a successful Starship program with just a $4 billion dollar development contract. That needs to be repeated!!! Just 2 SLS launches will cost as much as the ENTIRE FUNDING for the ENTIRE Starship Development Program! One SLS launch will cost as much as 62 Starship Launches!

    • @3gunshooter60
      @3gunshooter60 Год назад +13

      Precisely right!

    • @FirstLast-vr7es
      @FirstLast-vr7es Год назад +16

      I tend to think that Elon's foray into politics has also irritated some important people. Certainly not the primary cause here, but I doubt it helped his case very much.

    • @raedwulf61
      @raedwulf61 Год назад

      The USA has to keep pumping money into foreign and imperial wars.

    • @bruceatkinson5357
      @bruceatkinson5357 Год назад +8

      Driven by fat cat politicians, not a business person.

    • @hectorkeezy1633
      @hectorkeezy1633 Год назад +14

      Corruption is rampant. It’s depressing.

  • @exorias625
    @exorias625 Год назад +56

    it pisses me off that the US has the tech to put a base on the moon but nasa has their thumb so far up their rear they can bite it watching and waiting for spaceX to succeed or fail

    • @pakviroti3616
      @pakviroti3616 Год назад +8

      Politics. That's the biggest issue. So, maybe NASA doesn't land on the moon with a Starship lander, but that won't stop SpaceX if they can fund it outside of NASA.

    • @jonny555ive
      @jonny555ive Год назад +8

      ​@@pakviroti3616
      What it comes down to is exactly what you said, politics and taxpayer money, the government and NASA love taxpayer money but they have to be "transparent" as to where that money goes, (haha like we really know)
      Elon doesn't have that hanging over his head, he has so many contracts with so many different companies that are paying him to launch, he'll have it all figured out before NASA can figure out how to wipe their own butt.
      Elon's not going to sit around and wait for either of them...... I have zero doubt in Elon or SpaceX, they will far exceed and surpass NASA.

    • @pakviroti3616
      @pakviroti3616 Год назад +9

      @@jonny555ive They already have exceeded NASA, that is why they are hated by the bureaucracy. He has demonstrated that progress can be made rapidly for far less money than the old NASA/Legacy Contractor way.

    • @hillbillyintheasia6122
      @hillbillyintheasia6122 Год назад

      duh, think about for a minute have a liberal democratic running nasa .

    • @davidelliott5843
      @davidelliott5843 Год назад +2

      Elon will go to the Moon long before NASA even gets the design finalised (subject to endless change of course).

  • @rgeraldalexander4278
    @rgeraldalexander4278 Год назад +92

    NASA is embarrassed by SpaceX's ability to get the job done without cost overruns, tax payer grift, and years of delay.

    • @christopheblanchi4777
      @christopheblanchi4777 11 месяцев назад

      SpaceX was contracted by NASA? How do you explain that? Boeing had experience launching rockets before, it makes sense that NASA fund them more as they thought they would deliver. Boeing is a failing company, that NASA did not know and it has lots of lobbyists.

    • @finn1068
      @finn1068 10 месяцев назад +3

      Excuse me?

    • @DaddyElfMan
      @DaddyElfMan 10 месяцев назад

      exsqueaseme what? @@finn1068 NASA IS EMBARRASSED AND SHOWED UP BY MUSK AND SPACE EX GETTING THE JOB DONE. what, do you have a comprehension problem?

    • @doraemeah3424
      @doraemeah3424 10 месяцев назад

      @@finn1068
      😆🤣😂

    • @MrFuentepj
      @MrFuentepj 10 месяцев назад +3

      There's nothing to excuse.

  • @demej00
    @demej00 Год назад +21

    SLS started a joke that started the whole world laughing.

    • @jonny555ive
      @jonny555ive Год назад +8

      And the punchline is....... NASA !!!!!

    • @bf8088
      @bf8088 4 месяца назад

      NASA IS A JOKE

  • @SteveGrin
    @SteveGrin Год назад +30

    Why is 80 year old Bill Nelson running an organization that is supposed to be innovative and on the cutting edge?

    • @Matthew-dd6kp
      @Matthew-dd6kp Год назад

      Political reward for him losing his senate seat. The only reason he lost was because he helped Obama screw workers working on the space shuttle program.

    • @jujujohnson01
      @jujujohnson01 Год назад +4

      money... in the 2000's he was a senator and tried to disband NASA

    • @SteveGrin
      @SteveGrin Год назад +5

      That's the reason Boeing still has a contract even with their outrageous time and cost overruns - wonder how much Bill is getting?. "The years of delays and development problems have added up to a $688 million overrun per CNBC. NASA paid Boeing almost $5 billion to develop Starliner for the agency compared to SpaceX’s roughly $3 billion"

    • @hillbillyintheasia6122
      @hillbillyintheasia6122 Год назад

      think about for a minute have a liberal democratic running nasa .

    • @parajerry
      @parajerry Год назад

      Because he is a Democrat and will funnel NASA's budget to their corporate cronies in the legacy defense/rocket industry. If you think the goal is to get to the moon, you are sadly mistaken. The goal is to transfer as many tax dollars as possible to specific companies who donate a portion back to Democrats for their elections and corruption.

  • @powelllucas4724
    @powelllucas4724 Год назад +34

    During the sixties we sent animals, astronauts, and automobiles to the moon. Today, over sixty years later, we can't even decide how, or if, we could do it again. Seems like all we have learned is how to make excuses for not doing something. Sad.

    • @Dino_Hunter_420
      @Dino_Hunter_420 Год назад

      Or maybe we never got to the moon, for example nukes on the moon would be able to hit anywhere anything on the earth, doesn’t make sense why pentagon wouldn’t want nukes on the moon ?!

    • @Misst2050
      @Misst2050 Год назад +2

      Nukes can already be sent pretty much anywhere on the entire planet.

    • @millicentsmallpenny5837
      @millicentsmallpenny5837 Год назад

      @@Dino_Hunter_420 not sure why nukes on the moon are going to hit anything anywhere on earth any more efficiently than nukes on earth has been able to do since the 50s. Maybe you could elaborate
      There is no utility in making a base, transporting all that heavy material to the moon, just to belaborously return it to earth (taking days, instead of minutes) during some unlikely conflict. Gaining nothing whatsoever. (You do realize that this is not some video game, I do hope)
      New proof man has never been to the moon: If he had been, there would be a pentagon nuke base on the moon!!!!!??
      Both of these comments are kind of juvenile. For instance the OP assumes that something is amiss in that we didnt just keep going to the moon (with no particular purpose) just because we did it previously, Back then, the aim was just to prove we could go to the moon. Today that aim does not even exist, because we already did that
      I guess something is also amiss in that I was in NY in 1992, but have never been back there since. It proves something sensational -- perhaps that I never really were ever there. Very sound reasoning indeed!
      Too much time spent playing vidgames, perhaps

    • @kenfryer2090
      @kenfryer2090 Год назад

      it is expensive and there isn't much of a point to it. they should have a reason like a space station on the moon or mining

    • @Muskiehunter92
      @Muskiehunter92 Год назад

      @@Dino_Hunter_420 All your comment did was show you have no idea what you are talking about. Why on earth would they put nukes on the moon with no human presence. They can already launch them anywhere they want. Its also not hard to realize we absolutely were capable of reaching the moon back during a time when the US threw everything they had at developing a program to do so. The amount of money, recsources and people that went into the apollo missions is astonishing. If the US put that same effort into going to the moon right now, we could be there in no time flat... but the government has never been so crooked, so I doubt we will ever see it happen. It will be done by private companies going forward.

  • @SirWhiteRabbit-gr5so
    @SirWhiteRabbit-gr5so Год назад +95

    NASA and the FAA will thwart Musk at every turn.

    • @robertsigsby7788
      @robertsigsby7788 Год назад +11

      Well that would definitely be a criminal intent pursuant to 18 USC 1951

    • @gnarly706
      @gnarly706 Год назад +2

      Is jealous between two different government agencies.

    • @pepelegal333
      @pepelegal333 Год назад +3

      You underestimate the US government and the US as a whole. SpaceX is becoming so important to national interest that the idea of it being held back by pure red tape is difficult to contemplate.
      We should not forget that the US are a rules-based society, and that implies limits to how fast governments and individuals can push things through. Non-democratic societies may have an edge there, which is not a real advantage in my view, but this is a different story...

    • @hillbillyintheasia6122
      @hillbillyintheasia6122 Год назад

      think about for a minute have a liberal democratic running nasa .

    • @SLagonia
      @SLagonia Год назад +13

      @@pepelegal333 At this point, there are many that would let the whole program burn down rather than let SpaceX be part of it.

  • @djohannsson8268
    @djohannsson8268 Год назад +61

    The crew sleeping areas can have additional radiation shielding, since it is a smaller area compared to the rest of the ship. They can store water around the sleeping bunks in water bladders that add 1+ meters of water shielding to each bunk. So during an event the crew retires to their bunks, while the ship auto pilot maintains course.

    • @vodkarage8227
      @vodkarage8227 Год назад +5

      I wonder if we could use the moon to either make concrete or to mine lead that could then be launched off the moon and used to shield ships and space stations already in orbit? Even with those weights, it would probably be the equivalent of launching a regular payload from earth. I have no clue, just guessing here. But concrete and lead are best at stopping radiation due to their density. It is why nuclear plants use them.

    • @davidelliott5843
      @davidelliott5843 Год назад +2

      Nuclear power plants use concrete shielding.

    • @UAPslo
      @UAPslo Год назад

      @@davidelliott5843 concrete filed with lead

    • @AdventuresonTour
      @AdventuresonTour Год назад +4

      @@davidelliott5843 water is used as well for shielding in reactors along with cooling. Its actually better shielding than concrete

    • @markeh1971
      @markeh1971 Год назад +1

      Hi, believe water is good as well as plastics with water as part of structure.
      You can put insulation and protection on the outside from micro metiorites and junk believe NASA showed this recently, about a meter thick! This offered better protection than just metal.
      Being inside of the storage or plant still offers additional protection from radiation that is free.
      Take care all M

  • @pef1960
    @pef1960 Год назад +194

    Are SpaceX in trouble? No. But NASA are...

    • @jhendricks203
      @jhendricks203 Год назад

      Joe will soon be free to take over NASA . . .

    • @jonny555ive
      @jonny555ive Год назад +14

      ABSOLUTELY AGREED !!!!!

    • @naekosl3059
      @naekosl3059 Год назад

      President Biden stated they will put a black woman on the moon. So NASA (or SpaceX) is on the hook for that since the government has trained up several black female candidates to be lunar astronauts.

    • @baronedan22
      @baronedan22 Год назад +16

      NASA is

    • @johnbrobston1334
      @johnbrobston1334 Год назад +34

      For some reason people seem to think that the only thing SpaceX does is work on Starship. They don't seem to understand that at this point the space launch industry is SpaceX and the seven dwarfs. SpaceX is carrying nearly four times the mass to orbit as the entire rest of the space launch industry combined, doing it at a lower price than the competition, and with costs so low that they make good profits that they put back into the company.

  • @davidgutting4317
    @davidgutting4317 Год назад +21

    I wonder how long Elon will tolerate the FAA politics before he moves his launch site to a country that doesn’t have to subscribe to the FAA oversight. Elon is not known to Suffer an idiot. If the FAA decides to be the problem, Elon has soulitions available to him.

    • @BullyDrops
      @BullyDrops Год назад

      He will have to follow no matter where he goes. Launches in New Zealand follow FAA. Because it's a American company.

    • @kathrynck
      @kathrynck Год назад +1

      FAA is just the blunt instrument. The 'problem' is people (of particular mindsets) who dislike him buying Twitter.

    • @donaldekhoff7999
      @donaldekhoff7999 11 месяцев назад +1

      Don't be so sure. Rules are made to be broken when needs and conditions change.

    • @Mark-jp9dz
      @Mark-jp9dz 11 месяцев назад +1

      I don't think FAA are the entire problem this time. The EPA are the ones creating the problem.

    • @michaeldawson6309
      @michaeldawson6309 11 месяцев назад

      He could always threaten to launch from China they would welcome him with open arms to get in on the tech.

  • @themyrrd431
    @themyrrd431 Год назад +7

    It piss me off that place like alpha tech use click bait title like " No lunar landing" that's why i gave you thumbs down.

    • @jonny555ive
      @jonny555ive Год назад +2

      And that's why they get a thumbs down from me too.
      The funny thing is, they don't need to do that clickbait bullshit....
      It's a pretty solid channel. Pretty decent news reporting..... Although a little behind but I'm sure it takes time to put these videos together so, understandable.

  • @rockymntnliberty
    @rockymntnliberty Год назад +9

    I think if NASA keeps pussyfooting around, SpaceX will just do the moon mission themselves.

    • @hillbillyintheasia6122
      @hillbillyintheasia6122 Год назад

      think about for a minute have a liberal democratic running nasa .

    • @jason_m_schmidt622
      @jason_m_schmidt622 Год назад +2

      SpaceX doesn’t need the moon. NASA does😂

    • @rockymntnliberty
      @rockymntnliberty Год назад +1

      @@jason_m_schmidt622
      True enough, but it would be a good baby step for Mars.

    • @jason_m_schmidt622
      @jason_m_schmidt622 Год назад +1

      @@rockymntnliberty It would have been a good step decades ago I agree. Now since they’ve gone nowhere they are forced to skip those steps. Hopefully without catastrophic results

  • @girkgirkus7236
    @girkgirkus7236 Год назад +24

    On one hand SpaceX welcomes NASA money, on the other hand SpaceX is fully capable of landing on the moon without any involvement from NASA.

    • @miamianz
      @miamianz Год назад +1

      lol guess space x might want to train astronauts then.

    • @girkgirkus7236
      @girkgirkus7236 Год назад +4

      @@miamianz NASA definitely brings a level of expertise. But when SpaceX goes fully commercial, they will by default, have their own astronaut program. Also keep in mind that most of Starship flight activity will be fully automated.

    • @parajerry
      @parajerry Год назад

      @@miamianz There are many retired Nasa Astronauts and current ones that would jump at the chance to fly with SpaceX. That's called 'FREE' training for SpaceX. Besides, these are all new systems and no one at NASA has flown them either. SpaceX could probably train them better than NASA anyway...Crew Dragon anyone?
      Why do people constantly claim that government agencies do it better when they clearly don't when the commercial programs become viable?

    • @jaybodner4189
      @jaybodner4189 9 месяцев назад

      REALLY McFly...........

    • @girkgirkus7236
      @girkgirkus7236 9 месяцев назад

      @@jaybodner4189 really

  • @menotyou1234
    @menotyou1234 Год назад +61

    The level of hate Elon gets from the powers that be resembles what Nikola Tesla got.

    • @Hamphield
      @Hamphield Год назад +1

      Please, don't insult Elon Musk comparing him to that overrated fraud

    • @chuckintexas
      @chuckintexas Год назад

      ... and FOR THE same _reasons_ . Excellent Analogy . Still , as Citizens and as Constituency of Government representatives , its up to US to help them over these hurdles . Its no small THING to overcome the CRONYISM rampant throughout Government , and as such it MY become necessary that WE help Space-X bypass GOVERNMENT involvement - ours or ANY Government's involvement so WE can get OFF our home planet and into the Solar system .

    • @damfadd
      @damfadd Год назад +9

      ​@@Hamphieldyou mean the guy that practically invented the modern world??... might pay to someone homework

    • @parajerry
      @parajerry Год назад

      Anyone that disrupts the powers that be will be opposed. Elon is showing that the people/companies in power now are purposefully complicating and blocking innovation to protect their giant contracts and authority. They can't allow Elon to expose their fraud or the people might turn on them.

    • @Jay-uk8uw
      @Jay-uk8uw Год назад +1

      pretty much the same secret government-tied groups are the same problem.

  • @audience2
    @audience2 Год назад +15

    The first launch of the Starship Booster rocket was very successful, considering SpaceX's development model of many test iterations instead of trying to get everything right on the first launch.

    • @gravelydon7072
      @gravelydon7072 Год назад +1

      It cleared the launch pad and made it to 37km. Just clearing the pad without blowing up was goal #1.

    • @parajerry
      @parajerry Год назад +3

      The biggest obstacle to SpaceX is the government. Wouldn't surprise me to see him move some of the R&D testing to a friendly country that doesn't double-triple costs and timeline with endless bureaucracy. He only needs the complicated landing pad for tests that include landings....not needed for a few more launches.

    • @wildlyoptimistic1352
      @wildlyoptimistic1352 Год назад

      It doesn’t help that Elon is critical of the grand Poobah of the universe (Joe Biden) must punish dissenters.

  • @leapdrive
    @leapdrive Год назад +22

    NASA’s contractors are just expensive impediments for the moon landing. We know that after having delayed SpaceX for years, it would be the Starships which will be trucking in the equipment, supplies and building materials for the moon base. SLS and Dinetics just wouldn’t be able to keep up.
    Furthermore, if NASA really wants an orbiter on the moon, another Starship can be designed to do just that. So the Starship lander will rendezvous and dock with a Starship refueler and then rendezvous and dock with another on moon orbit. It becomes so much easer.
    NASA and its crony contractors just makes things too complicated. We need to change NASA’s culture when we can ASAP.

    • @kenfryer2090
      @kenfryer2090 Год назад

      if I remember rightly NASA has already got people on the moon and very successfully. spacex can't even orbit .. lol

    • @leapdrive
      @leapdrive Год назад +1

      @@kenfryer2090 , that’s because the SpaceX founder wasn’t even born then. Make more sense of your comments please. It’s like asking, “Have you seen India yet? Well Basco de Gamma had a long time ago.”

    • @jessepollard7132
      @jessepollard7132 10 месяцев назад

      @@leapdrive review your history it was Vasco da Gama not Basco de Gamma.... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasco_da_Gama

    • @leapdrive
      @leapdrive 10 месяцев назад

      @@jessepollard7132 , I didn’t check for the spelling, that’s all. You don’t have to be sarcastic.

    • @jaybodner4189
      @jaybodner4189 9 месяцев назад +1

      REALLY McFly...THEN YOU GET It DONE!

  • @jmcgregor316
    @jmcgregor316 Год назад +19

    SpaceX needs to move to a country that appreciates its accomplishments.

    • @brownmark8013
      @brownmark8013 Год назад

      Fly your own Starship assetstore/unity/packages/3d/vehicles/space/starship-launch-212072

    • @claude31400
      @claude31400 Год назад

      SpaceX could go to Russia or China .....

    • @vidyaishaya4839
      @vidyaishaya4839 Год назад

      ​​@@claude31400no, it couldn't. It could move to Florida, but Puerto Rico is better. Boca Chica is the factory, and test launch facility. SpaceX is already developing a launch pad at Cape Canaveral, where mission launches will most likely happen. Puerto Rico is closer to the equator than both, and not as far away as the Pacific Island territories.

    • @parajerry
      @parajerry Год назад +1

      Ghana already has the infrastructure and launch facilities. SpaceX could probably be up and running there in a few months.

    • @bruceatkinson5357
      @bruceatkinson5357 Год назад

      If NASA/FAA, etal keeps acting like a boat anchor nthat could happen.

  • @RainbowFish-
    @RainbowFish- Год назад +15

    The real problem is SpaceX is too cheap for NASA. They will choose a new version of design from the corporate welfare establishment space industry. Blue Origin, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, etc.
    Nobody ever thinks about how easy it would be for SpaceX to launch 4-5 tanker type refueling tanks/tugs on top of the Falcon-9 or Falcon Heavy. These tanks maybe smaller but could be launched very quickly and turned around and reused.
    It's up to SpaceX to precede on their own timelines and ambitious endeavors without them.

    • @naekosl3059
      @naekosl3059 Год назад +1

      ElonX doesn't seem like the person willing to pay bribes to Hunter in return for more NASA contracts. He knows governments and agencies want his services and he's fully booked up. He doesn't need to pay fees or hire lots of government family members in order to get contracts. Although it's probably hard to avoid doing so when they become official government liason employees to SpaceX.

    • @jonny555ive
      @jonny555ive Год назад

      Very well said..... And you're right, NASA sees SpaceX as a threat..... And you better damn believe that they are.
      Elon's got it figured out, he and SpaceX are going to far exceed NASA, I have no doubt.

    • @hillbillyintheasia6122
      @hillbillyintheasia6122 Год назад

      think about for a minute have a liberal democratic running nasa .

    • @frankmcgowan9457
      @frankmcgowan9457 Год назад +1

      In general, I agree with you. I don't understand why they would want to use Falcon 9 for this purpose, though. Each launch of a Starship tanker is a test flight for SH, SS and tanker mods. Doing those tasks with F9 just cuts back on the potential improvements to SH/SS.

  • @jroar123
    @jroar123 Год назад +83

    I hate it when someone says mishap. There was no mishap because this was a test best project and although it did not make it to orbit, it did identify several area's of improvement. I'm not holding my breath on the next launch making it to orbit as well. However, if it does make it all the better. So the FAA and NASA need to understand that SpaceX's way of advancement is to building blow it up and build it again. Something that has hindered NASA over the years.

    • @pacldawson
      @pacldawson Год назад +6

      Nowadays, some people’s view of “failure” have changed. I remember Bryant Gumbel asking a NASA official after the Challenger disaster, “so… is this the end of the space program?” What a short-sighted and - frankly - stupid question.

    • @Winkkin
      @Winkkin Год назад +12

      I think Musk used the first launch to dig the hole for the deluge system on purpose. Sped up the process immeasurably.

    • @tuberroot1112
      @tuberroot1112 Год назад +1

      "I hate it when someone says mishap. " It was not intentional but is was not a catastrophe, so mishap seems fair. It is now the technical term used in FAA rulings and assessments, so learn to live with it without trauma.

    • @sukumarmondal4260
      @sukumarmondal4260 Год назад +2

      The first flight was indeed a success as their main goal was to lift off without blowing

    • @TheKevlar
      @TheKevlar Год назад +5

      Hold your breath! Make no mistake this is a space race and the stakes are higher than Apollo...

  • @williamsedlock3903
    @williamsedlock3903 Год назад +19

    Honestly this is absolutely disgusting this is what keeps humanity down 👎 there's been too much of a break in pushing technology forward it doesn't take 30 years for each movement ridiculous

    • @fukhue8226
      @fukhue8226 Год назад +1

      Rapid easy development doesn't build Multi Billion Dollar companies and Rich CEO's!

    • @warrenwhite9085
      @warrenwhite9085 Год назад

      @@fukhue8226The evil uncaring irresponsible incompetence is NASA, not contractors. NASA selects contractors, contracts, incentivizes, directs, micro-manages them. NASA has screwed up, corrupted every contractors they have had. Thankfully, SpaceX said “FU NASA, we’ll do it ourselves, our way”.

    • @richardhamilton-gibbs6360
      @richardhamilton-gibbs6360 Год назад

      It's keeping America down.

  • @madmadmal
    @madmadmal Год назад +4

    Metzger’s statement is misleading. Yes, setting up a mine on earth could take a long time, because a mine on earth is specifically for gathering minerals. A mine on the moon is for creating a habitat which is a far simpler proposition since reaching a mineral is not the goal. Not to say that it is a simple proposition but creating a space with regolith on top may not require creating a void in the ground but a structure with regolith on top. That may mean a starship structure as the basis for the habitat.

    • @frankmcgowan9457
      @frankmcgowan9457 Год назад

      Why bury a Starship? Vertically or horizontally? How would they bury it standing? How would they lay it down without destroying it? How would that crew get home without it?
      When operational, Starship will be capable of transporting 100T of freight to the moon. If that freight includes an electric D-9 Cat - or a big payloader - and several inflatable habitat modules, cylinders of compressed air, groceries and sundries... Camp can be set up and the crew can retain Starship for their return home. The next crew can bring 100T of different stuff.

    • @madmadmal
      @madmadmal Год назад

      @@frankmcgowan9457 This is merely one suggestion and it is a suggestion for a colony. Therefor the ship would be designed for the purpose. I did say habitat.

    • @frankmcgowan9457
      @frankmcgowan9457 Год назад

      @@madmadmal
      One suggestion. I get it but you must admit it would be an expensive alternative to things suggested by folks in the industry.

  • @Winkkin
    @Winkkin Год назад +20

    The problem with Lunar Starship isn't Staeship, its the failure of BE4 and SLS
    We didn't go back to the Moon because of the impact of social issues. Thats the same thing thats holding up SpaceX. Concerns over sea birds and turtles have no place in discussion about the future of mankind

    • @cormackcormack4991
      @cormackcormack4991 9 месяцев назад

      🤣🤣 do you believe the fairy tale moon landing. NASA haven't been to the moon except area 51 conducted by hollywood 🤣🤣

    • @Winkkin
      @Winkkin 9 месяцев назад

      @@cormackcormack4991 That is some Russian inspired non-sense. It doesn't surprise me that its rearing its head again after 45 spent time in Putin's hammock.
      Americans did land on the Moon and the Earth is round.

    • @Winkkin
      @Winkkin 9 месяцев назад

      @@cormackcormack4991 p.s. I'm 70 and watched every Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo launch. There is no real question that we landed on the moon just the propaganda of the country that couldn't

  • @chilzone966
    @chilzone966 Год назад +6

    Whether NASA pays for it or not SpaceX is going.

  • @karlthemel2678
    @karlthemel2678 Год назад +6

    There is no launcher for the fuel and oxidizer. Right now, the only way to the Moon by Starship is by launching a third stage and a lander into LEO (fully fuelled).

    • @jonny555ive
      @jonny555ive Год назад

      Question for you, how do you know what Elon has or doesn't have....?
      How do you know that ?
      Do you work for SpaceX? Do you work at Boca chica?
      I'm betting that you don't and that you're just pulling facts out of thin air.
      Because how could you know...... You can't.

    • @johnbrobston1334
      @johnbrobston1334 Год назад

      Starship/Super Heavy is the launcher for the fuel and oxidizer.

  • @WaltBrgger
    @WaltBrgger Год назад +3

    NASA DID NOT declare "No Lunar Starship landing"
    NASA was NOT shocked
    The new changes to Starship are NOT related to HLS
    Clickbait is NOT ok

  • @gregorycoogle7621
    @gregorycoogle7621 11 месяцев назад +2

    Blue origin needs to stop their harassment regarding their moon mission… they never built the aircraft as of yet! 😮

  • @MrKen59
    @MrKen59 Год назад +12

    The lack of progress has little to do with SpaceX. With all the issues facing them from lawsuits and regulatory obstacles, I have no idea how anything gets done.

    • @parajerry
      @parajerry Год назад

      Elon's biggest mistake was trying to do this in the USA. He should have based it in some third-world country that would love the money, infrastructure, jobs, and fame that this type of project brings. Ayn Rand was 100% right in her books. The government and bureaucracy cannot allow Elon to progress without bowing down and paying grift to them. This is not a free country and hasn't been for a long time. He would already have Starship in orbit if he didn't;t have to deal with the crazy, unreasonable crap the government keeps throwing at him.

    • @ivankent5577
      @ivankent5577 Год назад +1

      Pissing off the politicians, including political appointees at NASA & FAA certainly doesn’t help either

    • @MrKen59
      @MrKen59 Год назад

      @@ivankent5577 exactly

    • @Goldengirl48
      @Goldengirl48 11 месяцев назад

      ​@@parajerryNot only griffers in government are a big problem, the crazy environmentalist and the EPA are the worst about scaring the public about the launching of Starship. They have strange hold the government and especially the FAA. If Cape Canaveral were to try to get approved to launch rockets from the east coast of Florida today, they would shut the whole operation of down because the Cape is situated on and island in the center of an animal preserve. NASA would never be able to get anything done if it was up to the EPA and the rest of the environmental groups. The way it is now, the Cape is grandfathered in to be able to launch when and whatever is needed. They existed before the EPA.

  • @Kharmatos13
    @Kharmatos13 11 месяцев назад +2

    Literally nobody is surprised that Nasa is pretending like they had any intention of actually going to the moon.

  • @tobyw9573
    @tobyw9573 11 месяцев назад +1

    Starship "had to be destroyed", not "Starship exploded", implying its explosion was not planned!

  • @richardnutt768
    @richardnutt768 Год назад +2

    SpaceX does not need NASA, NASA needs spaceX. Elon should do it on his own.

    • @parajerry
      @parajerry Год назад +1

      Hence the probable reason the government and FAA keep throwing obstacles in his way. Gotta slow him down so the money keep flowing to the legacy providers.

  • @heyovahere-cj4tp
    @heyovahere-cj4tp Год назад +3

    The bureaucracy/govt. finance thieves getting left behind, GOOD !! ✌️

  • @czjmaster
    @czjmaster Год назад +2

    To The Moon, Now is The Time🚀🌒

  • @albertross2322
    @albertross2322 Год назад +4

    Nelson is a political tool! He's personally worth millions! On a "CONGRESSIONAL SALARY!

  • @jbdelphiaiii7637
    @jbdelphiaiii7637 Год назад +9

    I think that the best design for a lunar lander is to put the hab below the rockets, but also integrate the hab with the rover, such that they're all mobile, with little or no need for much in the way of dust collecting lunar suits. Prebuilt dirtcrete 'garages' would be where they would shelter in place when needed during solar SMEs

  • @aciaspacehg65
    @aciaspacehg65 Год назад +19

    SpaceX didn’t shock NASA

    • @SLagonia
      @SLagonia Год назад +4

      NASA likely assumed that SpaceX would stop their progress during the investigation, but they just kept going.
      Now they've been told they can't launch, and they just assumed SpaceX would stop then... But SpaceX just keeps going. Can't launch S25? Start shakedown of S26.
      So they have no choice but to just cancel the whole program. Nothing else is going to slow SpaceX down. But even then, SpaceX will probably just keep rolling until they can do it themselves.

  • @BanditBandit-m5i
    @BanditBandit-m5i Год назад +2

    LOL, as if SpaceX was ever going to wait on NASA. Sorry NASA It's happening.

  • @robdedrick2052
    @robdedrick2052 Год назад +2

    I believe the Paint is for Protection . The paint could reduce degradation of the Heat Resistant Tiles . Especially when half would be exposed to Sun and half to Shade during Daylight Hours . Safety First .

    • @StrayCatOR
      @StrayCatOR 11 месяцев назад

      Daylight hours, in space?

  • @kevinbissett293
    @kevinbissett293 Год назад +6

    Love Your Channel ALPHA TECH. The info You give so complete. Keep doing what You are doing.

  • @fixxxer525
    @fixxxer525 Год назад +2

    So why does NASA dictates who lands on the Moon? Just sounds like NASA is just salty because everyone is out pacing them.

  • @TexanUSMC8089
    @TexanUSMC8089 Год назад +5

    If NASA is concerned with the delay of Starship...why don't they stop delaying it. NASA, FAA, and the EPA have delayed Starship launches multiple times. I think establishment aerospace companies have sent lobbyists to politicians, pushing them to slow SpaceX down. Falcon 9 has just about put them out of business. Starship would make them obsolete and irrelevant.

    • @toadsauce8091
      @toadsauce8091 Год назад +3

      🎯 “Starship will make them obsolete”

  • @jason_m_schmidt622
    @jason_m_schmidt622 Год назад +2

    NASA needs SpaceX. SpaceX does not need NASA. Understand?

  • @BSJWright
    @BSJWright Год назад +2

    SpaceX will still go to the moon regardless. Starship, despite the OFT1 failure is far better than anything NASA has currently

  • @jeremytaylor3532
    @jeremytaylor3532 Год назад +2

    If these nose cones, are to be the SLS lander, and moon base structures, they may well leave the heat shield tiles on, for solar radiation protection. In fact they could make the ceramic tile with a different formula to increase the density.
    Many ceramics had heavy metals and radioactive uranium compounds.
    By using depleted Uranium they could increase the density without the radioactive component.
    Most older red brick homes would put out far more radiation. And it would absorb troublesome ions.

  • @JeffBrazeel-fe4wc
    @JeffBrazeel-fe4wc Год назад +9

    First attempt by Starship wasn't a Failure but, a Learning Experience.
    As Elon Musk has said B4, SPACE is Hard. Which is ALL TOO TRUE, especially with the Rapid Iteration of Starship Evolution/Upgrading/Advancement.
    SpaceX is under the Microscope due to being the ONLY Domestic Launch Capable/Reliable Vehicle to Lift cargo and Astronauts on the ISS. As well as Developing Starship to Complete the Artemis Missions.
    Having already Completed the Contract with NASA, and begun a New Contract to Continue to the Future.
    Actually SpaceX is 95% ready for 2nd Launch. IMHO
    Booster and Starship are already Stacked and standing on the OLM (Orbital Launch Mount) at this time.
    SpaceX has already completed the corrective actions but, the EPA is sticking their noses into the mix, causing possible further delays.

    • @jonny555ive
      @jonny555ive Год назад

      It's our government and their baby NASA trying to stifle SpaceX and Elon Musk...... Because he's going after their sugar daddy.
      (NASA/Taxpayer money)
      The sad thing is is our government doesn't like competition.
      Pretty damn sad if you ask me, standing in the way of science because of money. 👎👎
      Of course, that is just my opinion, I could be wrong.
      (But I don't think I am)

    • @bruceatkinson5357
      @bruceatkinson5357 Год назад

      NASA's antiquated management is THE PROBLEM. They will continue to stifle progress because they have no choice and China will be first.

  • @philippeboisclair4488
    @philippeboisclair4488 Год назад +1

    don't forget they also need ship to ship refuling for the HLS so this ship also might not need to came back on Earth so no flap and no heat shield done just keep it in orbit

  • @ghanova
    @ghanova Год назад +2

    Any bureaucrat that claims that Artemis is a viable and affordable launch vehicle is either being paid by snouts in troughs to say that or is just stupid.

  • @StevenRedcay-gw5ci
    @StevenRedcay-gw5ci Год назад +4

    There go's Nasa's best chance to get to the moon in there own time-line ! ! !

    • @parajerry
      @parajerry Год назад

      Remember, the real goal is not to reach the moon. It is to pay out large amounts of taxpayer dollars to the old-guard defense contractors and grifters that push the woke, leftist agendas. As long as the money keeps flowing, no one involved cares if we ever actually reach the moon. Elon Musk is about results, and his goal is reaching the Moon and Mars as an affordable cost. He is the exact opposite of NASA and the government.

  • @DavidKnowles0
    @DavidKnowles0 11 месяцев назад +1

    I don't see why the space suit companies and the ship companies can't agree on what size the doors will be, well yesterday.

  • @abominabelle
    @abominabelle Год назад +1

    Finest powder, millions of tons perfectly ready for 3d printed infrastructure.

  • @janstahley9762
    @janstahley9762 Год назад +3

    Space X just needs to put a few orbits in there then go to the moon on their own, put nasa out of the picture.

  • @prestonmiller9953
    @prestonmiller9953 10 месяцев назад +1

    NASA cannot stand it that SpaceX did a better job at everything that they did

  • @KenBurp
    @KenBurp Год назад +2

    they want to continue the "Cash Cow" ....... Next!

  • @arkangeln910c8
    @arkangeln910c8 Год назад +2

    Studies have shown that magnets can be used in space ships to deflect radiation, in the same way as the earth`s magnetic field. The thing is that iron or other magnets are stronger than the earth`s , so I expect that soon NASA, SpaceX, will device a system to cover areas inside the ship to protect astronauts in long stay in outer space.

    • @chrisalbertson5838
      @chrisalbertson5838 10 месяцев назад

      You need REALLY BIG magnets. What we care about is the strength of the magnetic field at a great distance from the ship. We'd need sci-fi level fusion power for that. If you must sheild the astronauts, then use a vest and helmet that they wear full-time. Yes it might be 100 pounds but it's weightless in orbit.

  • @gregorymurphy5055
    @gregorymurphy5055 Год назад +6

    SpaceX should just do their own lunar landing. If FAA keeps trying to block Starship, they should look into launching from International waters.

    • @parajerry
      @parajerry Год назад +2

      No need. Ghana has facilities and infrastructure already. Just barge the rocket down there and launch. For testing, landing legs and their weight would be a great option to the mecazilla towers.

  • @davidpetersen1
    @davidpetersen1 Год назад +2

    Nasa is going to "delay" themselves right out of any claim to lunar real estate.

    • @jason_m_schmidt622
      @jason_m_schmidt622 Год назад +2

      As they have done for 50+ years

    • @jason_m_schmidt622
      @jason_m_schmidt622 Год назад

      What they need is a national security justification for a moon base. And China will give them that

  • @juliancrooks3031
    @juliancrooks3031 Год назад +6

    Starship would better serve in orbit around the moon as a base for landers to dock with for resupply in stead of a permanent space station

    • @Dragineez774
      @Dragineez774 Год назад +1

      Why not do both? At less than one tenth the price. And be reusable. And carry more payload and more people?

    • @chrisalbertson5838
      @chrisalbertson5838 10 месяцев назад

      No. It takes 12 tankers to refuel the lunar-bound starship. This is because Starship is most big steel tanks and huge heavy engine that are not neeed for a space station. Bette to use Starship to launch parts of a station. Using Starship as the station means you are sending 8X more mass then will be used. Also Starship is only cheap if it is reused, Astation-starship would never be reused.

  • @andycig2993
    @andycig2993 9 месяцев назад +1

    Before NASA complains about Space X.
    They need to get their own shit off the ground.

  • @user-kn5vp2qq6d
    @user-kn5vp2qq6d Год назад +4

    So China or India or Russia will be first on south pool and pick up the lead. For NASA theirs domestic political games are more important.

    • @Riteaidbob
      @Riteaidbob 11 месяцев назад

      Russia isn't going anywhere.

  • @picturesalbum4532
    @picturesalbum4532 Год назад +2

    Setting up a Mine on the Moon might be easier then earth no environmental study to deal with !

  • @perry8498
    @perry8498 Год назад +3

    Really don’t think spaceX need s nasa

  • @writheinthedeepfry3859
    @writheinthedeepfry3859 Год назад +1

    We put men on the moon with basically prehistoric tech. Why is it taking such a Herculean effort to even come close to that over a half century later?

  • @joewilson2258
    @joewilson2258 Год назад +3

    Does SpaceX use tax payer by the billions to construct their rockets ? No, but nasa does as well as having long delays with mistakes after mistakes as well as costing more money to use older rockets technology.

  • @jamfork3871
    @jamfork3871 10 месяцев назад +1

    SpaceX should launch multiple modules with everything the X-onauts need in advance to a human arrival on the moon that way theirs already a base so all X-onauts have to to do is link the modules together. And Elon should do this without Nasa's approval ASAP!

  • @robertm1672
    @robertm1672 Месяц назад

    The picture of Bill Nelson with Chuck Schumer tells me all I need to know.

  • @vail8150
    @vail8150 Год назад +2

    The HLS ship can also be equipped to self generate an electro magnetic flux field to reroute cosmic radiation away from the crew

    • @lanemedcalf9506
      @lanemedcalf9506 Год назад

      That sounds really cool! Haven't heard about that anywhere before! That would be awesome if true!

    • @BionicBurke
      @BionicBurke Год назад

      Yeah... ok... by the time that kind of technology exists in a light and safe enough package to send into space Star Citizen will be out.

    • @chrisalbertson5838
      @chrisalbertson5838 10 месяцев назад

      Have you worked out how much power is required to do this? You would need some huge solar arrays. Would those solar power panels by heavier or lighter than HDPE shielding? Once we have portable fusion reactors that can power a city and fit on a small truck, many thngs will be possible. Maybe in 1,000 years. The best idea I read about is placing the crew inside the water tank r using the water you need to take as a shield. The other thing they can do is make the crew wear a radiation sheilding vest. Yes it might weigh 100 ponds but it is weightless in space.

  • @NigelDixon1952
    @NigelDixon1952 Год назад +1

    Don't you mean "When NASA finally land a crew on the moon for the first time" !

  • @RickL_was_here
    @RickL_was_here Год назад +2

    Ya, having China land on the moon first is a bad idea, you just know they'll fuck up that place as much as they've fucked up this one....

  • @mahoneytechnologies657
    @mahoneytechnologies657 11 месяцев назад +1

    Space X Does Not need permission from anyone to land on the Moon!

  • @tomturnbull3723
    @tomturnbull3723 Год назад +3

    It occurs to me that the Starship that has no flaps or heat shield could be their first tanker for orbital fuel transfer to the HLS Starship... thoughts?

    • @chrisalbertson5838
      @chrisalbertson5838 10 месяцев назад

      Maybe, but then the tankers can only fly once. They need 10 or 12 trips from the ground to Earth orbit to refuel the lunar lander. Would they waste 12 starships?

  • @jimclester4754
    @jimclester4754 Год назад +1

    Do you know that famous line in the Bible? FAA “ let my people go.” Go Go Go!

  • @steve5090406
    @steve5090406 Год назад +11

    The nose-cone mockup represents a vehicle similar to Red Dragon, the crewed lunar Starship will separate into two vehicles in lunar orbit and only the top half will land with crew, the bottom half will stay in orbit as a orbiter, the cargo lunar Starship version will land complete. This change will make the Starship more palatable for NASA.

    • @frankmcgowan9457
      @frankmcgowan9457 Год назад +2

      You might be right but maybe not.
      If they split HLS into 2 modules, orbiter and lander, the new configuration will require at least one more set of engines (three, total), propellant tanks, pumps, refill facilities, docking clamps and a host of things I haven't thought of... Each additional part is a new potential point of failure with at least one mode of failure. Hence, "The best part is no part."
      Maybe that mockup is just a mockup of the portion of the vehicle they know needs to be finished out and/or significantly modified. They don't really need a mockup of the main engines and fuel storage portions as the Superheavy will provide information they can use to improve that stuff. Plus, they probably don't feel the need to work 100 feet off the ground when they can just remove that 100 feet of structure, anyway, and basically walk in a few feet above grade.
      They could be prototyping the nose section for crewed ships as the nose sections will be built prior to being stacked on the vehicle as finished up to the forward dome. Forward of the forward dome is where the differences for each finished type- freight, crew, lander, satellite launcher, tanker - will most likely manifest, anyway.
      We should expect to see many - perhaps a dozen or more - nose cones being fitted out for different special purpose variants, any of which can be stacked and welded onto the generic Starship "engine and prooellant" section aft of the forward dome.

    • @steve5090406
      @steve5090406 Год назад

      @@frankmcgowan9457 thanks for your response, the moon Starship does not need to be the one hundred berth Mars Starship, in fact I think it only needs to accommodate 10 crew, so the mockups of the regular Starship do not apply, it should only have half the number of decks and room for propellant storage. The separation point will be just below the line of thrusters, also regarding propellant/accomodations ratio look at the Red Dragon proposal, it was supposed to land and take off from Mars, higher gravity than the moon.

    • @bruceatkinson5357
      @bruceatkinson5357 Год назад

      @@steve5090406 No guarantee SpaceX will be allowed to land on Mars, is there?

  • @SLagonia
    @SLagonia Год назад +2

    Every day, NASA, The FAA, etc are proving this is completely personal. They are willing to let it all fall apart rather than go to SpaceX.

  • @aprendiz-sete
    @aprendiz-sete Год назад +7

    A Spacex precisa ter cuidado com possível sabotagem. NASA e cultura Woke. 😂

  • @tuberroot1112
    @tuberroot1112 Год назад +1

    Bureaucracy will be the death of humanity.

  • @kkorff
    @kkorff Год назад +2

    Behavioral unknowns in space/Lunar environments? Just look at how the crazies act on airlines at only 30,000 ft with 4 hrs flight times.

  • @Truly-Galactic
    @Truly-Galactic Год назад +3

    When we land on the moon... how many laws and rules and regulations will need to be signed off to "Launch from the moon"... meaning...
    After we have landed on a section of the moon, will the FAA ground the moon landing crew until they clean up the dust they created?

  • @ShermanNx-jc4tp
    @ShermanNx-jc4tp 11 месяцев назад +1

    It's a no-brainer, send robots to do all the mining, preferably AI controlled with options to manually remote control. It will be more efficient and can run 24/7 without resting or using up soft resources. The mission objective should be: Can we send up a miner robot, mine some resources and send back just the material all without human intervention? Can we then set up an automated facilities on the moon?

  • @nicksantos43
    @nicksantos43 Год назад +3

    We all know how this is going to go.. Elon is going to send Starship to the moon regardless of NASA and I whole heartedly hope he does it before HLS!

  • @aciaspacehg65
    @aciaspacehg65 Год назад +4

    This is old information ….
    I understand that it takes time to make these videos but anyone that pays attention to starbase will know this already

  • @kurtjensen7264
    @kurtjensen7264 Год назад +2

    Play no attention to the naysayers. Elon has proven each and every one of them wrong. Let that sink in.

  • @brendanpells912
    @brendanpells912 Год назад +4

    The only thing that shocked NASA is SpaceX cutting a door-shaped hole in a Starship carcass and doing some CGI renderings and pretending they're making progress on designing HLS lander.

    • @videonaj
      @videonaj Год назад +2

      That internal stuff is easy compared to building the worlds largest rocket that also happens to be reusable. There is no close 2nd place. NASA would be insane to doubt SpaceX upcoming capabilities.

    • @MattZaycYT
      @MattZaycYT Год назад +3

      If It wasn't for SpaceX the USA would be completely cut out of access to the ISS. Thay are carrying all ISS missions, Space Force missions. They built the cheapest and most reliable rocket ever and a new unthinkable reusable technology. Yet building the most ambitious rocket and ship ever is not enough progress for you?

    • @brendanpells912
      @brendanpells912 Год назад

      @@MattZaycYT By cheapest and most reliable I presume you're referring to Falcon 9. Why isn't SpaceX reducing launch costs if it's so cheap? Of course, you have no idea what Falcon 9 really costs because the SpaceX accounts are a closed book.

    • @jonny555ive
      @jonny555ive Год назад

      ​@@brendanpells912
      SpaceX accounts are closed because they are a PRIVATE COMPANY,
      Why don't you post your bank account and statements and let's see how you're doing...... How dumb does that sound huh ?
      Yeah SpaceX they're a joke.... They don't know what they're doing.
      You are completely 100% SO, not connected on this Earth.
      WOW !

  • @Study49
    @Study49 Год назад +1

    During its maiden launch, Starship lost 8 engines! Is that serious?

  • @Larrymarx
    @Larrymarx Год назад +4

    *SpaceX* holds all the cards when it comes to space travel... NASA knows or has a pretty good idea there's life elsewhere in the universe... As for China, the word on the street is they want to bring back to Earth the complete *Apollo 11* landing site lunar module, flag and everything in between to be placed in a museum for all to visit... How cool is that!?

    • @frankmcgowan9457
      @frankmcgowan9457 Год назад +3

      I think those landing sites are best where they are. If they are moved to a Chinese museum, I am afraid they will just disappear forever. A generation after that the Chinese landing will be "first."

    • @Larrymarx
      @Larrymarx Год назад +2

      @@frankmcgowan9457 I agree with you 100%

    • @leapdrive
      @leapdrive Год назад

      China better not touch those Apollo landing gears and flags. They are property of the USA.

  • @MissingTools
    @MissingTools Год назад +2

    Good material in this episode, BUT you failed to put "No Lunar Starship landing" into context, OR you just made a false claim.

  • @danielbecker4365
    @danielbecker4365 Год назад +1

    Wait I understand. Space X does not pay lobbyists!

  • @verdigo5892
    @verdigo5892 Год назад +3

    Next time I see the word "shocked" in a title i'm just gonna block the channel.

  • @michaelslack4937
    @michaelslack4937 4 месяца назад

    TBH...I smell Boeing playing "Legacy Politics" tossin the ole boy card.

  • @PreciousPerrotte-t4m
    @PreciousPerrotte-t4m 4 месяца назад

    one step for man one great leap for humanity

  • @creative-gk2rg
    @creative-gk2rg Год назад +2

    Safer to land supplies first, if possible, without people.

  • @donaldliwe
    @donaldliwe 11 месяцев назад +1

    NASA has no say-so on any private entity that wants to explore the planet Earth to go where they need to go free willingly and go to the moon for you willingly and go to Mars anywhere else in

  • @bazoo513
    @bazoo513 Год назад +1

    0:07 - They said no such thing. What _was_ said was that it wasn't clear that the planned timeline of Artemis III mission was sustainable.

  • @Rennyteam359
    @Rennyteam359 8 месяцев назад

    Private companies should work together and not rely on NASA.

  • @leonardlackey2813
    @leonardlackey2813 Год назад +2

    SpaceX can beat SLS to the moon!

  • @jefferyshall
    @jefferyshall Год назад

    I can only PRAY that Space-X can somehow beat NASA to the moon!! If NASA keeps calling SpaceX out as an issue.

  • @islandendeavor
    @islandendeavor Год назад

    Screw NASA - SpaceX should do it on their own!

  • @billienomates1606
    @billienomates1606 9 месяцев назад +1

    I am just waiting for some new and current photo's of the original moon landing site!

  • @gutpunch6724
    @gutpunch6724 Год назад +1

    Excellent content. Very informative.

  • @waynenix3871
    @waynenix3871 10 месяцев назад +1

    I didn’t know any country owned the moon. Who says a private company can’t go there if they want to?

  • @Rennyteam359
    @Rennyteam359 Год назад +1

    For once I agree with NASA. That particular version of Starship is not ready for landing. Without a certified landing pad that ship has a high probability of falling over dooming all who would fly on it. Even with an abort built in the craft would not complete it's mission therefore a wate of money. For now a more conservative landing vehicle is wiser.