271–280 of 1001 posts
I can imagine SpaceX choosing to self-finance a mission to the moon and beat NASA at it.
Self-finance ? Is that what you call US government money?
https://deepnewz.com/company-earnings/spacex-2025-revenue-to...
Why does this sounds so... Entitled? NASA regresses so far that they are now unable to do anything by themselves... Now suddenly there is a new moon race and they start pointing to a public company that is not sticking to a schedule. A company that does some impressive things, and has helped them out (probably not out of the goodness of their hearts, but hey), and is doing things they could not. I would be an adult a…
> probably not out of the goodness of their hearts, but hey It's a terrible idea to rely on this. Why would you want people to work this way when you can just have a regular-person financial transaction that aligns your interests?
Since blue origin is still developing their new glenn rocket with only a single launch so far what is the chance they use falcon heavy to deliver their blue moon lander
Remind me why we need to get to the moon again?
2. The masses need circuses. As for bread, Marie Antoinette's press secretary said it best.
3. Trump thinks he'll corner the market on cheese.
Why does this sounds so... Entitled? NASA regresses so far that they are now unable to do anything by themselves... Now suddenly there is a new moon race and they start pointing to a public company that is not sticking to a schedule. A company that does some impressive things, and has helped them out (probably not out of the goodness of their hearts, but hey), and is doing things they could not. I would be an adult a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is starship on schedule?
> Is starship on schedule? Difficult to say relative to current Artemis timelines, which have to date been mainly delayed by Orion. They're currently looking on schedule to perform an orbital propellant transfer in 2026. That likely means a commercial launch before the end of next year, which is crazy. How that relates to HLS is up in the air, and probably will be until the end of next year.
It's not difficult to say. They are behind schedule and everyone, not just Duffy, is talking about it and have been for awhile.
I don't care - beyond how getting to the moon will help future space exploration - and risk is high when developing new tech, but I also don't care about SpaceX. It's very possible Starship won't work out; that's risk and I'm sure SpaceX and NASA people understand that. Why must people on HN defend SpaceX at every turn, like a PR agency. Does anyone point out a genuine, significant, negative about Starship? Why might it not work? What are the risks?
I think more competition is great and hope they reopen the contract. Private industry competing on what is now prosaic space technology, such as orbit and even the moon, is great. Let NASA do the cutting edge stuff like flying to Europa or looking back to the beginning of time or investigating climate change. (Notice that private industry still can't land on the moon reliably - 56 years after NASA demonstrated it.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Having a deadline is how things get done. With no deadline, nothing gets accomplished.
The Moon directive was set by Donald Trump in 2017. This is just the same deadline being pushed another year because of failures. Deadlines that get constantly pushed aren't deadlines at all. As I recall, SpaceX and Artemis project was supposed to be Moon by 2024. At least originally. But then SpaceX blew up all the rockets (successfully testing them or something) and now we've wasted damn near a decade.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
SLS was 6 years and like 10-20 billion $ over budget and nobody ever complainged, in fact they got consistantly more and more money. And that is for technology that is fundamentally from the 1970s. Starship is trying to do the hardest thing in the history of space flight. And of course its not on schedule, its schedule was always insane. The way of approching things as 'is X on schedule' is a fundamentally false way…
> SLS was 6 years and like 10-20 billion $ over budget and nobody ever complainged, in fact they got consistantly more and more money Ah, but SLS were the right kind of people . Allegedly. /s SpaceX, less so. Allegedly.
Doesn't that attitude, in reverse, describe most HN commenters every time SpaceX or SLS is mentioned?