4 ms·

Few of us like having our work critiqued by an "outsider". Especially when such critique threatens your paycheck. Nevertheless, it's hard to imagine any kind

Few of us like having our work critiqued by an "outsider". Especially when such critique threatens your paycheck. Nevertheless, it's hard to imagine any kind of sustainability when each launch costs north of $2 Billion and nearly all hardware is thrown away each time. In that sense, his criticism was very valid, even if tough to hear.

JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
> Few of us like having our work critiqued by an "outsider" I said aerospace community. Not NASA. Plenty of people hate Artemis. Most people hate SLS. But they hate it for good reason. Destin touched on some of that. But because he missed Artemis's purpose, he bungled that criticism too. I like Destin. But he missed the mark pretty badly on that video, and I judge him for now following up with clarification.
- timschmidt 11mo ago
  > I said aerospace community. Not NASA. NASA doesn't build rockets. ULA (Lockheed Martin + Boeing), Northrup Grumman, Aerojet Rocketdyne, etc. do. That's what I took "aerospace community" to mean. The community of people working in aerospace. Artemis has shifted focus several times now, since before it was called "Artemis" as each political administration has emphasized different goals, and as mission planning has evolved with hardware development. Over the years I have read everything from an abstract Moon-to-Mars testbed, a 5 year deadline crash program to land "the first woman and the next man" at the lunar south pole, a sustained lunar presence, the "first woman and first person of color" on the moon, safety science and Mars prep, and latest a de-scoping of the cis-lunar gateway station and shift toward private industry. Such things are difficult to avoid under constantly changing leadership. Given that, I don't see any problem with the way Dustin presented the situation, nor do I feel any kind of need for an apology or clarification.
  - JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
    > ULA (Lockheed Martin + Boeing), Northrup Grumman, Aerojet Rocketdyne, etc. do. That's what I took "aerospace community" to mean Fair. Not who I talk to. None of them get their bread buttered by Artemis. A few would if it were dumped. > I don't see any problem with the way Dustin presented the situation, nor do I feel any kind of need for an apology or clarification Fair enough. I thought the "we're going, right" was childish. But it works for YouTube, and it's not like NASA didn't know they were inviting an influencer. But suggesting NASA should just redo Apollo was dumb, and he should realise it's dumb. If that were the case, I'd argue for cancelling the programme.
    - timschmidt 11mo ago
      > None of them get their bread buttered by Artemis. A few would if it were dumped. https://www.nasa.gov/artemis-partners/ https://www.nasa.gov/artemis-partners/ "NASA prime contractors Aerojet Rocketdyne, Axiom Space, Bechtel, Blue Origin, Boeing, Amentum, Jacobs, Lockheed Martin, Maxar Space Systems, Northrop Grumman, and SpaceX" > suggesting NASA should just redo Apollo was dumb Dumber than redoing Shuttle and throwing away proven reusable RS-25 engines? It's been a while since I watched it, but it seems to me one example highlights the absurdity of the other.

JumpCrisscross 11mo ago

> Few of us like having our work critiqued by an "outsider" I said aerospace community. Not NASA. Plenty of people hate Artemis. Most people hate SLS. But they hate it for good reason. Destin touched on some of that. But because he missed Artemis's purpose, he bungled that criticism too. I like Destin. But he missed the mark pretty badly on that video, and I judge him for now following up with clarification.

timschmidt 11mo ago
> I said aerospace community. Not NASA. NASA doesn't build rockets. ULA (Lockheed Martin + Boeing), Northrup Grumman, Aerojet Rocketdyne, etc. do. That's what I took "aerospace community" to mean. The community of people working in aerospace. Artemis has shifted focus several times now, since before it was called "Artemis" as each political administration has emphasized different goals, and as mission planning has evolved with hardware development. Over the years I have read everything from an abstract Moon-to-Mars testbed, a 5 year deadline crash program to land "the first woman and the next man" at the lunar south pole, a sustained lunar presence, the "first woman and first person of color" on the moon, safety science and Mars prep, and latest a de-scoping of the cis-lunar gateway station and shift toward private industry. Such things are difficult to avoid under constantly changing leadership. Given that, I don't see any problem with the way Dustin presented the situation, nor do I feel any kind of need for an apology or clarification.
- JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
  > ULA (Lockheed Martin + Boeing), Northrup Grumman, Aerojet Rocketdyne, etc. do. That's what I took "aerospace community" to mean Fair. Not who I talk to. None of them get their bread buttered by Artemis. A few would if it were dumped. > I don't see any problem with the way Dustin presented the situation, nor do I feel any kind of need for an apology or clarification Fair enough. I thought the "we're going, right" was childish. But it works for YouTube, and it's not like NASA didn't know they were inviting an influencer. But suggesting NASA should just redo Apollo was dumb, and he should realise it's dumb. If that were the case, I'd argue for cancelling the programme.
  - timschmidt 11mo ago
    > None of them get their bread buttered by Artemis. A few would if it were dumped. https://www.nasa.gov/artemis-partners/ https://www.nasa.gov/artemis-partners/ "NASA prime contractors Aerojet Rocketdyne, Axiom Space, Bechtel, Blue Origin, Boeing, Amentum, Jacobs, Lockheed Martin, Maxar Space Systems, Northrop Grumman, and SpaceX" > suggesting NASA should just redo Apollo was dumb Dumber than redoing Shuttle and throwing away proven reusable RS-25 engines? It's been a while since I watched it, but it seems to me one example highlights the absurdity of the other.