Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

NASA selects SpaceX Starship system to land on moon - Discussion of Preparations

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.

ZERO surprise here. We knew AWS was not even in contention for this, given the animosity between Musk and Bezos. Not a lot of love between Musk and Gates either, so that left just one of the big 3 cloud providers. I would have still liked to have seen SpaceX go with a smaller provider than one of these 3.
 
"In March 2021, Elon Musk indicated he was hopeful that the first orbital flight could be made as early as July 2021"


Meanwhile Bezo's competitor to even the Falcon 9 has not ferried passengers or cargo . . . anywhere. Kudos to them demonstrating it can land, but they don't have the flight history of the Falcon 9, and the New Glenn is much further behind development than Starship.
 
Meanwhile Bezo's competitor to even the Falcon 9 has not ferried passengers or cargo . . . anywhere. Kudos to them demonstrating it can land, but they don't have the flight history of the Falcon 9, and the New Glenn is much further behind development than Starship.

Incompatible timelines not withstanding (NS came before F9), NS is not and was never intended as a F9 competitor. It was always an up-and-down thing, never orbital.

NG is a ~competitor with F9 in so far as the mass-price, which will likely be comparable.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: bkp_duke
Have to hand it to Ballast Bill. He's stepping right up to play politics with the Alabama contingent for a HLS jobs program (Dynetics). Give Bill his budget funding request and eventually they'll get a lander, Jeff gets a lander, whatever. With Options from A to Z, everyone deserves a piece of the pie.

Not mentioned in this article, Bill went on a rant about China and the Moon, even filled with 8 by 10 color glossy photos of their recent lander on the lunar surface. I get that he's hoping to generate a sense of urgency, but it's tough trying to sell to a crowd more interested in generating jobs and feeding corporate donors. Meanwhile, NASA's collaboration and funding for SpaceX's Starship HLS continues on hold pending the outcome of the GAO decision on the fate of the two outstanding HLS protests.
 
Sometimes gotta hand it to Bernie. Famous for railing against Amazon for not paying federal taxes. Here he's not mincing words when it comes to describing how he feels about Jeff and his billions. This is a picture of Bernie's most recent amendment filing. Designed to squash the 10 billion dollar pork bill introduced on behalf of BO and Dynetics, which is intended to breathe life into their HLS protest.
E2L23snXoAoP3at.jpg
 
There's mostly scathing comments associated with that BO ARS article. It's amusing that Jeff wants a lunar program so badly he'll now pay to play. His lander's "National Team" spreads the job wealth, but adds more processes within the larger Artemis program. Similar to SpaceX's Dragon 2 and Boeing's Starliner, I don't have an issue with developing additional commercial landers. But initially, the quickest way back to the moon is for NASA to focus on integrating their first choice lander alongside their primary contractor. In the 60's Grumman and NASA succeeded with the LM. Additional contractor burdens won't help to accelerate NASA's goal of returning to the moon this decade.

BO's ongoing problems with New Glenn and their ULA contract for BE-4 engines raise doubts about their lunar lander. The Blue Moon lander will need either New Glenn or a Vulcan rocket to reach lunar orbit. Starship is basically one program. It's time to keep things moving.
 
Also, I don't think hatch height is such a great differentiator. Apollo LM's was 11.5 feet up, so...

And I should get out of this rat-hole, but I could not help but enjoy my time down here (yes, they considered using a rope):