Finally! Trump's NEW Decision Made NASA's Greatest COMEBACK EVER To Be Next SpaceX! SLS Is Over!

[@mikedelta1441]

I think having a NASA administrator who is a pilot, astronaut, successful entrepreneur and a business leader is much less 'weird' than the lawyers and politicians we've had in recent years.

[@robertbrander2074]

Make NASA Great Again ! ... Cheers to Trump and Isaacman !

[@gaius_enceladus]

EXCELLENT move! Isaacman is young and he sounds like a real go-getter! Awesome appointment!

[@kevinj6874]

Isaacman is going to clean up NASA he will do great and get rid of all the Cost plus plus.

[@railgap]

Who told you to say that, child?

[@esecallum]

billion dollars to build the leaning launch tower !!!

[@jamescarter8311]

@@railgap A child could run NASA better that your career bureaucrats.

[@clarencehopkins7832]

Mr Isaacman , is an amazing man for this job.

[@jamesanderson7831]

Isaacman is a verry good choice.

[@spacexcommunity]

Too good!

[@franksander1070]

Hallelujah finally NASA is going through a bureaucracy and inefficiency cleans up saving millions to the nation.

[@VAMPastro]

out of every tax dollar you pay, 0.038 cents go to NASA.

[@jamescarter8311]

@@VAMPastro and SLS costs $4 billion per launch. They spend more for one RS-25 engine than a new Falcon Heavy. That 0.028 cents could go a lot further don't you think?

[@myfavoritemartian1]

I did not see this coming, but it gave me a big smile!

[@stephensfarms7165]

Mr. President please cancel SLS, and put that money into StarShip. Thanks. 🙏

[@paulbrunton877]

Absolutely correct 100%.

[@understandingautism1389]

Amen!!

[@jesseblas1745]

ikr!!

[@danielwhitehouse7682]

Let's get it done

[@RamblingRodeo]

This is a good pick, that i didn't expect and in all honesty, not on my bingo card! As for SLS and Starliner, it will SUCK to end it, but it needs to, this is NOT ideal and what a waste of money. I also think it is a good pick for what was suggested in this video, he is right for the time, NASA had its time to lead us into the new frontier of space, now it is time to redirect NASA into a new era of guidance of the private sector. While focusing on the good areas that NASA does that many don't know, like science, education and outreach in getting ppl interested in space.

[@wmffmw]

Boeing CEO said the company can only survive in a Cost Plus Contract environment. Meanwhile SpaceX is making a profit on fixed cost contracts. Who deserves to survive?

[@JohnLinares-g7v]

Boeing will have to win contracts based on merit. Moving their HQ nearby to DC won't help anymore.

[@michaeljomy1733]

So basically SpaceX is gonna be NASA. Thank you Trump!

[@stephensfarms7165]

Yes, I agree. Don’t need NASA when we have SpaceX ‼️‼️

[@ApolloKid1961]

@@stephensfarms7165 NASA is neither a manufacturer nor a contractor.

[@PhantomDisciple]

Nope its not, its gonna be fair share for all commercial space company's. And its true Spacex is leading at the moment. All thanks to president Trump 🎉

[@MarioP9511]

@@stephensfarms7165 NASA is much more than rockets. SpaceX makes rockets not science exploration.

[@samualcrocket1405]

NASA is going nowhere fast with the Biden/Nelson team. Clueless, along with Boeing. With Musk, decisions will be based on cost effective technology that insures the US will have colonies on the moon and Mars in the shortest time posible. It will be a collaboration with a highly involved and intelligent Jared Isaacman

[@KristenAnnWinslet]

SpaceX Falcon Heavy would allow multiple missions to the moon instead of the once a year SLS; a far more cost efficient way to get back to the moon and stay there. Lots to work out, but a much better solution to the current quagmire NASA is in today.

[@russellamaru5175]

Outstanding choice, Mr. Isaacman!!

[@MarkLandrebe-ef5yd]

Boeing had there chance(s), just because it is Military contractor, no need for US to be beholden to it. Time for SpaceX !

[@danielwhitehouse7682]

Don't like how we got here , But would love to see this happen

[@JosephDeLuna-yj8vg]

This Is Interesting! And A Big Fight From Boeing!!!

[@elonmusk_360_1]

Having a NASA administrator who is a pilot, astronaut, successful entrepreneur, and business leader feels far less "weird" compared to the lawyers and politicians we've seen in recent years.

[@robertchristianson1187]

These amazing changes have been a long time coming and oh so necessary. Thank you again President Trump and Elon Musk for bringing efficiency and common sense back to NASA

[@AdamArndt]

I say. Dump SLS but keep Orion. Fly Orion/Artemis on starship. We should all push this idea

[@nickv8816]

What makes you think Orion is worth keeping? Absolutely no proof and what if it has similar problems to Starliner?

[@MarioP9511]

Dragon is cheaper to send into orbit to dock Starship.

[@AdamArndt]

@@nickv8816 Orion has already flown a few times? And other than the heat shield thing.no problems. And it's a way for NASA to save face. They do know how to make a spacecraft. Not so good with the rockets

[@digitalnomad9985]

@@nickv8816 "what if it has similar problems to Starliner?" Orion PASSED it's first flight test with a higher-speed-than-LEO-deorbit reentry. That's no guarantee of perfection, but it's already better than Starliner.

[@spacetechnology.1]

Mr. President, please consider canceling the SLS program and reallocating those funds to support Starship development. Thank you!

[@adamphelps2369]

The prospect of cancelling the SLS is sad to those of us who have worked so hard on it over the years. The SLS rocket is not your enemy it’s just a more expensive less capable alternative I don’t see why people are so passionate to see it end. I too wish nasa had a bigger budget and a more experimental attitude towards space exploration. But to wish it to end when it’s closer than ever to completion I just doesn’t make sense.

[@cindypenwell772]

Get rid of the old leadership and old ideas. Bring in new young blood.🎉

[@BBBrasil]

Pointing out the obvious, Mr Isaacman is not a politician. NASA projects often span more than four years-beyond a single administration. Politicians, however, are typically motivated to fund projects that they can claim credit for during their term. This creates a challenge: Why would politicians allocate money to NASA for long-term initiatives that might only be completed under a successor, allowing someone else to take the credit? The answer also explains why we have SLS. The answer lies in how NASA structures its projects: by committing to long, expensive programs that create jobs in key districts and states. This allows politicians to say, 'I brought these jobs to my constituents,' regardless of when the project is finished. Once those jobs are in place, no politician wants to be the one to cancel the budget, risking voter outrage for cutting local employment. This dynamic secures NASA's funding and keeps its long-term missions on track.

[@robertmestl1215]

Now if we can only get congress to funnel more $$$ into NASA's budget to provide more monetary incentives to private companies to join in on the space launch initiatives, increasing competition, thus driving down launch costs even further!

[@nzoomed]

This is great news, and its pretty damn obvious Elon Musk is behind all of this. Im hope we see SLS launch a crew around the moon next year as its been far too long since humans have last been to the moon, I think we can expect to see rapid development of starship next year.

[@kevinhancock6483]

SLS HAS GOT TO GO !!!!

[@cdmc012599]

Get em to stop using CGI for EVERYTHING', they'd be conversing at least.

[@Schmitzelhaus]

Am i the only one that thinks Isaacman is a freakin great last name by the way? 😅

[@brianburton7716]

I'm pretty sure congress is gonna have something to say about this (no!)

[@MarioP9511]

SpaceX, Rocket Lab, Sierra Space etc.

[@Olconer]

holy shit he's doing kinda everything a lot of people wanted lol it's like having one of the masses in the president seat lmao jared freacking isaacman

[@railgap]

You are hallucinating. You are delusional. When government gives business everything they want, that is called FASCISM, doofus.

[@dubistverrueckt]

The rocket equation says NO.

[@MrHalvnir]

NO MORE S.L.S. !!!

[@nerdwatch1017]

I actually feel with all these private start ups building all new more efficient reusable and cheaper to launch rockets. I feel NASA should just be better off doing the major space technology development as well as making a new nuclear power engine that can strap onto a large frame in orbit that Starships can dock on to up to 8 ships at a time. Then launch off to mars on the times when mars and earth are farther apart with the nuclear powered engines getting the ships to mars in under 3 months. Then in Martian orbit the new starships undock to land on the surface with all new crew and equipment. Then starships fly up and dock with the space tug each loaded with science experiments and Martian soil samples and some crew that I’ve been on Mars for 3+ years. This tug sounds great to me for 2 main reasons #1 with Nuclear engines the trips are much slower. #2 with this tug all 8 starships can fill up there fuel tanks but then dock and save that fuel for when they reach mars.

[@nerdwatch1017]

I understand about the jobs that are there for SLS but I feel every current worker so long as they can go from there current job that seems to be going nowhere for many years to come. To a new job working on something new that will actually go somewhere within. 4-8 years wether that’s some brand spanking new This NASA 2.0 that plans developing a new bad ass fully reusable rocket or even 80% reusable in the same way space X develops there rockets.

[@ApolloKid1961]

Is it finally going to happen and I can see the 7th manned moon landing?

[@kevinhancock6483]

Artemis has got to go!!!!

[@MyMilitaryMind8686]

I’m so happy to see Nelson get the boot. Terrible senator and terrible NASA director.

[@stanmitchell3375]

Fire nasa and boing,if the engineers are any good they can find another job

[@glenrich-uu9zr]

A Moon resort will be built with a new NASA .

[@esecallum]

Why does NASA not do everything in house?

[@hackman669]

Cost

[@PC-nf3no]

I think Issacman is a good pick. I would want to see the Senate hearings and see how he answers some tough questions. The talk of cancelling SLS is premature. If Starship was a matured system, that would be a no brainer. Until then, we should continue with SLS. I have read some of the Inspector General's reports. It is objective and comprehensive. The part that concerns me is the cost of SLS in later flights where it becomes an operational system. Up to this point, and for the foreseeable future, SLS is in development. The starts, stops, and redo's have added significant cost. Designing, testing, redesigning, retesting and production of Orion, SLS, Launch Towers, Space Suits, Landers, Rovers, and Gateway have pushed the limits of science and budgets. It's growing pans. But how much will the system cost once it's matured and operational? It will never be competitive to SpaceX or other commercial providers, but commercial providers rarely will provide services that are not profitable. That's where the government steps in to provide investment. Government provides the risk and paves the way for the commercial sector to provide the Tax base return. Issacman will have to leverage that cost investment vs. return.

[@smevox7490]

How is the talk of cancelling SLS premature? Its 15 years late and billions upon billions over budget. Starship is already more mature than SLS.

[@nzoomed]

Im guessing they will keep SLS for a handful of launches, but redirect all future funding to SpaceX, watch Jeff Bezos get angry.

[@Mikesukes]

Junk SLS and anything Boeing!

[@AdamArndt]

NASA NEEDS TO DUMP SLS BUT KEEP ORION. they do spacecraft good. Not rockets. SpaceX does rockets. Put Orion on a SpaceX rocket. It will literally save BILLIONS. TO THE MOON BABY!!!!

[@skysurferuk]

I've never been sure that Starship should be human rated. That flip & burn on landing? Who the hell looks at that & says "Yeah, I'd LOVE to ride THAT car!". Nobody, that's who. Get Dream Chaser human rated to shuttle people to orbit & bring them back. Now THAT's a ride I'd love!

[@smevox7490]

You realize the Shuttle had one shot at a landing right?

[@rocroc]

I think Jared Isaacman is a great guy and does a great job at whatever he does but a poor selection for NASA. He is better at doing what he's doing and staying out of the politically corrupt management of NASA. Send in someone who can make the cuts and fight the battles to come including over haul of the funding process, particularly congressional approval for individual line item projects. Someone also has to control SpaceX and make sure they follow rules appropriate to their business. Besides, without Isaacman, the US will not have a timely space station. Axiom is falling apart pretty quickly as is the current space station. It might last five years or five months.

[@railgap]

I could argue that Isaacman has never run a large organization before (because it's true) but it doesn't much matter because the top slot is a figurehead, all he does is interface with congress but does very little actual work. Source, half a dozen NASA engineers who have served under multiple administrators. Put an actual aerospace engineer in that slot, someone who has been running NASA departments for decades and knows how things actually work and what things DON'T WORK because they've already been tried - someone with institutional knowledge.

[@nickv8816]

That’s been the problem in the past. Set in their ways and not willing to innovate

[@oatlord]

Alright, another billionaire buddy of Trump.

[@kdenyer1]

This sounds like the best of trumps picks 😂

[@billhart9832]

Isaacman is a quality nomination and should be an innovative leader. The only competent choice by the orange clown thus far.

[@chrisolix3441]

Your elitist attitude is showing.

[@railgap]

He has no experience running an organization the size of NASA. He has no experience interfacing with congress, which is the NASA admin's primary job. You are delusional.