34 ms·

Related: NASA chief suggests SpaceX may be booted from moon mission [1]. Blue Origin could snatch SpaceX's Starship lander contract. This looks increasingly a g

Related: NASA chief suggests SpaceX may be booted from moon mission [1]. Blue Origin could snatch SpaceX's Starship lander contract. This looks increasingly a good idea. [1] https://www.cnn.com/2025/10/20/science/nasa-spacex-moon-landing-contract-sean-duffy https://www.cnn.com/2025/10/20/science/nasa-spacex-moon-land...

admax88qqq 8mo ago
> This looks increasingly a good idea. Why?
- dmbche 8mo ago
  SpaceX hits delays according to the article
  - ramraj07 8mo ago
    And blue origin has no delays because they don't even launch anything.
    - T-A 8mo ago
      https://www.reuters.com/science/blue-origin-launches-new-glenn-rocket-companys-first-nasa-scale-science-mission-2025-11-13/ https://www.reuters.com/science/blue-origin-launches-new-gle...
- lateforwork 8mo ago
  The reason for the entire moon mission is national prestige. Is financial fraud consistent with our national prestige? There are better companies.
  - inglor_cz 8mo ago
    The original Moon mission was masterminded by a literal card-carrying ex-member of the Nazi party (Wernher von Braun) and the American public back then didn't seem to mind.
    - bigyabai 8mo ago
      All rocketry was, back then. You wanted ballistic telemetry? If you didn't know someone who worked on the V-2, you had to launch your own sounding rockets. I think the parent's point stands. There's a lot more pragmatic concern with the damage SpaceX could do in 2026, versus the damage Nazis could do in the 1960s.
  - Natfan 8mo ago
    why must usamericans insist that they be the best at everything? it seems psychopathic...
  - fuzzfactor 8mo ago
    >Is financial fraud consistent with our national prestige? You're right, that may be all we have left to show for it if people can't come up with something better. Whether it's Musk or anybody else who's a real example of outright fraud, in a top position where honesty and straightforward dealing mean more than anything.
kirrent 8mo ago
Sean Duffy is no longer acting administrator of NASA. This proposal was apparently part of a bid to get the support of a coalition of old-space companies and new-space non-SpaceX companies. As part of that strategy he apparently leaked Isaacman's Project Athena document and was backgrounding that he was a SpaceX plant. But, Isaacman is administrator now, and whatever you think about Isaacman and his relationship to SpaceX, I don't think there's much merit in thinking one of Duffy's half thought out plans is likely to be carried out.
- lateforwork 8mo ago
  Sadly this seems correct. When Trump was re-elected Elon Musk pushed for Jared Isaacman to be appointed as NASA administrator. When the pick went another way, it led to some real friction between Musk and Trump. Now, with Isaacman finally at the helm of NASA, it looks like Musk’s influence over the agency has come full circle.
  - indoordin0saur 8mo ago
    SpaceX has a better price, better track record with getting things done on time (because the others are bad, not because SpaceX is perfect) and an extremely impressive safety record with launches. A completely neutral party would still select SpaceX.
deleted 8mo ago
[deleted]

admax88qqq 8mo ago

> This looks increasingly a good idea. Why?

dmbche 8mo ago
SpaceX hits delays according to the article
- ramraj07 8mo ago
  And blue origin has no delays because they don't even launch anything.
  - T-A 8mo ago
    https://www.reuters.com/science/blue-origin-launches-new-glenn-rocket-companys-first-nasa-scale-science-mission-2025-11-13/ https://www.reuters.com/science/blue-origin-launches-new-gle...
lateforwork 8mo ago
The reason for the entire moon mission is national prestige. Is financial fraud consistent with our national prestige? There are better companies.
- inglor_cz 8mo ago
  The original Moon mission was masterminded by a literal card-carrying ex-member of the Nazi party (Wernher von Braun) and the American public back then didn't seem to mind.
  - bigyabai 8mo ago
    All rocketry was, back then. You wanted ballistic telemetry? If you didn't know someone who worked on the V-2, you had to launch your own sounding rockets. I think the parent's point stands. There's a lot more pragmatic concern with the damage SpaceX could do in 2026, versus the damage Nazis could do in the 1960s.
- Natfan 8mo ago
  why must usamericans insist that they be the best at everything? it seems psychopathic...
- fuzzfactor 8mo ago
  >Is financial fraud consistent with our national prestige? You're right, that may be all we have left to show for it if people can't come up with something better. Whether it's Musk or anybody else who's a real example of outright fraud, in a top position where honesty and straightforward dealing mean more than anything.

kirrent 8mo ago

Sean Duffy is no longer acting administrator of NASA. This proposal was apparently part of a bid to get the support of a coalition of old-space companies and new-space non-SpaceX companies. As part of that strategy he apparently leaked Isaacman's Project Athena document and was backgrounding that he was a SpaceX plant. But, Isaacman is administrator now, and whatever you think about Isaacman and his relationship to SpaceX, I don't think there's much merit in thinking one of Duffy's half thought out plans is likely to be carried out.

lateforwork 8mo ago
Sadly this seems correct. When Trump was re-elected Elon Musk pushed for Jared Isaacman to be appointed as NASA administrator. When the pick went another way, it led to some real friction between Musk and Trump. Now, with Isaacman finally at the helm of NASA, it looks like Musk’s influence over the agency has come full circle.
- indoordin0saur 8mo ago
  SpaceX has a better price, better track record with getting things done on time (because the others are bad, not because SpaceX is perfect) and an extremely impressive safety record with launches. A completely neutral party would still select SpaceX.

deleted 8mo ago

[deleted]