NASA declared "No Lunar Starship landing" but SpaceX just shocked NASA with new HLS Starship design

NASA declared "No Lunar Starship landing" but SpaceX just shocked NASA with new HLS Starship design
1, Sources of music
The-Doctor-main-version
2, Sources of images & videos
Caelan Animation: / caelan55
SpaceXvision: / spacexvision
TijnM_3DAnimations : / m_tijn
TijnM: / @tijn_m
velin3d: / velin3d
ErcX: / ercxspace
/ ercxspace
LabPadre: / labpadre
/ labpadre
StarshipGazer: / starshipgazer
/ starshipgazer
Kevin Randolph: / cosmicalchief
WAI: / @whataboutit
SpaceX: / @spacex
Stanley Creative: / @stanleycreative
Astrolab: www.youtube.com/@Astrolab-Spa...
Evan Karen: / @evankaren
TheSpaceEngineer: / mcrs987
DeepSpaceCourier: / @deepspacecourier4224
iamVisual: / @iamvisualvfx
Christian Debney: / @christiandebney1989
ErcX Space: / @ercxspace
Canadian Space Agency: / @canadianspaceagency
ACTUSPACEX: / @actuspacex6995
C-bass Productions: / @cbassproductions
@InfographicTony: / infographictony
NASA Goddard: / @nasagoddard
NASA: / @nasa
starship.mobile.my3ideas.com: starship.mobile.my3ideas.com/
THELONELYCAT: www.youtube.com/@thelonelycat...
Tamás Török/@tomket7: / @tomket7
Everyday Astronaut: / @everydayastronaut
Starbase Surfer: / cnunezimages
Elon Musk: / elonmusk
Ryan Hansen Space: / @ryanhansenspace
Trevor Mahlmann: / trevormahlmann
THELONELYCAT: / @thelonelycat
==========
NASA declared "No Lunar Starship landing" but SpaceX just shocked NASA with new HLS Starship design
NASA has recently announced a substantial alteration to its lunar exploration agenda: No Lunar Starship Landing!
This has raised concerns for the future of SpaceX's ambitious endeavors.
Is SpaceX in big trouble?
Stay tuned as we dive into this problem and more in this episode of Alpha Tech!
The south pole of the moon is a stunning place. Towering mountains are bathed in perpetual sunshine, and the lunar dust, fine as powder, gleams in unfiltered light. Plunging craters exist in permanent shadow and hide pockets of ice in their gray rock, the water frozen and undisturbed for as long as three billion years.
Here, somewhere along this silent terrain, NASA wants to land a new crew of astronauts. Like those who came before, these visitors will suit up and go for a walk, their bodies bouncing in the low gravity.
But, that lunar stroll won't happen anytime soon, it could be delayed longer.
Speaking at an Aug. 8 briefing at the Kennedy Space Center, Jim Free, NASA associate administrator for exploration systems development, said the Artemis 3 mission still has a formal launch date of December 2025 but that he was monitoring potential delays in hardware needed for the mission.
NASA declared "No Lunar Starship landing" but SpaceX just shocked NASA with new HLS Starship design

[@demej00]

SLS started a joke that started the whole world laughing.

[@jonny555ive]

And the punchline is....... NASA !!!!!

[@scottwendt9575]

Of course, NASA and Boeing can’t afford to allow SpaceX to show Moon Missions can be more affordable. The grifting of billions of taxpayer funds was exposed by the commercial Crew program where Boeing continues to get paid for cost overruns on a crew capsule that still hasn’t delivered humans to the ISS. And now, with the cost of each launch of SLS estimated at $2,500,000,000 NASA and their Boeing pals can’t allow SpaceX to build a successful Starship program with just a $4 billion dollar development contract. That needs to be repeated!!! Just 2 SLS launches will cost as much as the ENTIRE FUNDING for the ENTIRE Starship Development Program! One SLS launch will cost as much as 62 Starship Launches!

[@3gunshooter60]

Precisely right!

[@FirstLast-vr7es]

I tend to think that Elon's foray into politics has also irritated some important people. Certainly not the primary cause here, but I doubt it helped his case very much.

[@raedwulf61]

The USA has to keep pumping money into foreign and imperial wars.

[@bruceatkinson5357]

Driven by fat cat politicians, not a business person.

[@hectorkeezy1633]

Corruption is rampant. It’s depressing.

[@rgeraldalexander4278]

NASA is embarrassed by SpaceX's ability to get the job done without cost overruns, tax payer grift, and years of delay.

[@christopheblanchi4777]

SpaceX was contracted by NASA? How do you explain that? Boeing had experience launching rockets before, it makes sense that NASA fund them more as they thought they would deliver. Boeing is a failing company, that NASA did not know and it has lots of lobbyists.

[@user-tq1ys8fd8h]

Excuse me?

[@DaddyElfMan]

exsqueaseme what? @@user-tq1ys8fd8h NASA IS EMBARRASSED AND SHOWED UP BY MUSK AND SPACE EX GETTING THE JOB DONE. what, do you have a comprehension problem?

[@doraemeah3424]

@@user-tq1ys8fd8h 😆🤣😂

[@MrFuentepj]

There's nothing to excuse.

[@fredbogs3792]

Bill Nelson needs to step down. He is constantly blaming SpaceX for delays when the SLS and space craft is YEARS behind!!!!

[@exorias625]

it pisses me off that the US has the tech to put a base on the moon but nasa has their thumb so far up their rear they can bite it watching and waiting for spaceX to succeed or fail

[@pakviroti3616]

Politics. That's the biggest issue. So, maybe NASA doesn't land on the moon with a Starship lander, but that won't stop SpaceX if they can fund it outside of NASA.

[@jonny555ive]

​@@pakviroti3616 What it comes down to is exactly what you said, politics and taxpayer money, the government and NASA love taxpayer money but they have to be "transparent" as to where that money goes, (haha like we really know) Elon doesn't have that hanging over his head, he has so many contracts with so many different companies that are paying him to launch, he'll have it all figured out before NASA can figure out how to wipe their own butt. Elon's not going to sit around and wait for either of them...... I have zero doubt in Elon or SpaceX, they will far exceed and surpass NASA.

[@pakviroti3616]

@@jonny555ive They already have exceeded NASA, that is why they are hated by the bureaucracy. He has demonstrated that progress can be made rapidly for far less money than the old NASA/Legacy Contractor way.

[@hillbillyintheasia6122]

duh, think about for a minute have a liberal democratic running nasa .

[@davidelliott5843]

Elon will go to the Moon long before NASA even gets the design finalised (subject to endless change of course).

[@SirWhiteRabbit-gr5so]

NASA and the FAA will thwart Musk at every turn.

[@robertsigsby7788]

Well that would definitely be a criminal intent pursuant to 18 USC 1951

[@gnarly706]

Is jealous between two different government agencies.

[@pepelegal333]

You underestimate the US government and the US as a whole. SpaceX is becoming so important to national interest that the idea of it being held back by pure red tape is difficult to contemplate. We should not forget that the US are a rules-based society, and that implies limits to how fast governments and individuals can push things through. Non-democratic societies may have an edge there, which is not a real advantage in my view, but this is a different story...

[@hillbillyintheasia6122]

think about for a minute have a liberal democratic running nasa .

[@SLagonia]

@@pepelegal333 At this point, there are many that would let the whole program burn down rather than let SpaceX be part of it.

[@djohannsson8268]

The crew sleeping areas can have additional radiation shielding, since it is a smaller area compared to the rest of the ship. They can store water around the sleeping bunks in water bladders that add 1+ meters of water shielding to each bunk. So during an event the crew retires to their bunks, while the ship auto pilot maintains course.

[@vodkarage8227]

I wonder if we could use the moon to either make concrete or to mine lead that could then be launched off the moon and used to shield ships and space stations already in orbit? Even with those weights, it would probably be the equivalent of launching a regular payload from earth. I have no clue, just guessing here. But concrete and lead are best at stopping radiation due to their density. It is why nuclear plants use them.

[@davidelliott5843]

Nuclear power plants use concrete shielding.

[@user-sb5jz6uv2j]

@@davidelliott5843 concrete filed with lead

[@AdventuresonTour]

@@davidelliott5843 water is used as well for shielding in reactors along with cooling. Its actually better shielding than concrete

[@markeh1971]

Hi, believe water is good as well as plastics with water as part of structure. You can put insulation and protection on the outside from micro metiorites and junk believe NASA showed this recently, about a meter thick! This offered better protection than just metal. Being inside of the storage or plant still offers additional protection from radiation that is free. Take care all M

[@XCX237]

SpaceX should just create it's own space agency. No need for government bs . Im sure other companies would love to get on board.

[@noppornwongrassamee8941]

The FAA and NASA regulate civilian spaceflight (the FAA covers the in-atmosphere part IIRC). Government bs is unavoidable. Although I do believe NASA can't actually forbid SpaceX from doing a moon mission as long as Starship meets operational safety requirements. But SpaceX is a for profit company, so need someone to pay them for a Moon mission or otherwise have a profit making scheme for a Moon mission before they can justify launching a Moon Mission. I have to say, using Starship as a support vessel for NASA's moon mission is clever. It gives the Moon Mission more resources to play with and humiliates Space X's competition by showing how much more stuff Starship can carry compared to competing spacecraft.

[@bazoo513]

Without "government BS" (both NASA-developed technology and money from NASA, DARPA, NRO, USSF, now even ESA...) SpaceX would not exist, of course. Stop reading Ayn Rand garbage and look at facts.

[@mikewallace8087]

Chris you dream like Peter Pan.

[@XCX237]

​@@mikewallace8087if someone didn't dream, no one ever would have gone to space 🤔

[@mikewallace8087]

@@XCX237 Robert Godard and Werner Von Braun dreamed , then Russia gov. and U.S. Gov. picked it up as the pioneers . Now Elon strives to make money with rockets, that's okay. When it comes to Rocket launches in U.S. airspace , Elon salutes the F.A.A .

[@rockymntnliberty]

I think if NASA keeps pussyfooting around, SpaceX will just do the moon mission themselves.

[@hillbillyintheasia6122]

think about for a minute have a liberal democratic running nasa .

[@jason_m_schmidt622]

SpaceX doesn’t need the moon. NASA does😂

[@rockymntnliberty]

@@jason_m_schmidt622 True enough, but it would be a good baby step for Mars.

[@jason_m_schmidt622]

@@rockymntnliberty It would have been a good step decades ago I agree. Now since they’ve gone nowhere they are forced to skip those steps. Hopefully without catastrophic results

[@pef1960]

Are SpaceX in trouble? No. But NASA are...

[@jhendricks203]

Joe will soon be free to take over NASA . . .

[@jonny555ive]

ABSOLUTELY AGREED !!!!!

[@naekosl3059]

President Biden stated they will put a black woman on the moon. So NASA (or SpaceX) is on the hook for that since the government has trained up several black female candidates to be lunar astronauts.

[@baronedan22]

NASA is

[@johnbrobston1334]

For some reason people seem to think that the only thing SpaceX does is work on Starship. They don't seem to understand that at this point the space launch industry is SpaceX and the seven dwarfs. SpaceX is carrying nearly four times the mass to orbit as the entire rest of the space launch industry combined, doing it at a lower price than the competition, and with costs so low that they make good profits that they put back into the company.

[@davidelliott5843]

SpaceX will do their own moon landing. It’s the perfect analogy for Mars without the huge time delays.

[@parajerry]

I would absolutely love to see NASA fall farther and farther behind schedule so Elon decides to just run a full lunar Starship program himself and put SpaceX astronauts on the moon months or years before Artimus gets off the ground.

[@user-hp1gn5mg7c]

@@parajerry Other countries would pay to put their astronauts on the moon, and could help finance the project.

[@chrisalbertson5838]

Not it is not close to an analogy. The #1 killer problem for a SpaceX Mars round trip is refueling the Starship to Fly Mars-to-Earth. They need a fuel depot on Mars with enough reserve fuel to handle an aborted countdown. They need spare parts in place. Basically, they need a "Starbase" on Mars BEFORE the first crew arrives. Little things like a pad to land on so Mars-Rocks don't fly up and kill the engines on landing and takoff. They need dozens of one-way trips and many robots to assemble all of this. Mars is 100X harder then the Moon.

[@jaybodner4189]

Why do you challenge?? Why can't WE work together for the common GOAL of getting BACK to the moon together!!

[@jaybodner4189]

OK, so GET IT DONE!!! Oh, NASA GOT IT DONE. Look, PLEASE believe me, I SUPPORT BOTH ELAN and NASA,WHAT ALL of us need to do is SUPPORT NASA and and all that Makes OUR collective dream come true!!

[@SteveGrin]

Why is 80 year old Bill Nelson running an organization that is supposed to be innovative and on the cutting edge?

[@Matthew-dd6kp]

Political reward for him losing his senate seat. The only reason he lost was because he helped Obama screw workers working on the space shuttle program.

[@jujujohnson01]

money... in the 2000's he was a senator and tried to disband NASA

[@SteveGrin]

That's the reason Boeing still has a contract even with their outrageous time and cost overruns - wonder how much Bill is getting?. "The years of delays and development problems have added up to a $688 million overrun per CNBC. NASA paid Boeing almost $5 billion to develop Starliner for the agency compared to SpaceX’s roughly $3 billion"

[@hillbillyintheasia6122]

think about for a minute have a liberal democratic running nasa .

[@parajerry]

Because he is a Democrat and will funnel NASA's budget to their corporate cronies in the legacy defense/rocket industry. If you think the goal is to get to the moon, you are sadly mistaken. The goal is to transfer as many tax dollars as possible to specific companies who donate a portion back to Democrats for their elections and corruption.

[@audience2]

The first launch of the Starship Booster rocket was very successful, considering SpaceX's development model of many test iterations instead of trying to get everything right on the first launch.

[@gravelydon7072]

It cleared the launch pad and made it to 37km. Just clearing the pad without blowing up was goal #1.

[@parajerry]

The biggest obstacle to SpaceX is the government. Wouldn't surprise me to see him move some of the R&D testing to a friendly country that doesn't double-triple costs and timeline with endless bureaucracy. He only needs the complicated landing pad for tests that include landings....not needed for a few more launches.

[@wildlyoptimistic1352]

It doesn’t help that Elon is critical of the grand Poobah of the universe (Joe Biden) must punish dissenters.

[@LightWingStudios]

Musk will go to the Moon when he is ready and NASA can't do a thing about it.

[@scottwendt9575]

He and a fellow billionaire may very well beat NASA to the next human circumlunar trip. Artemis is supposed to carry 4 crew toward the end of 2024, but “Dear Moon” could fly soon as well carrying 9 civilians from around the globe on a trip designed to inspire artists. It is an amazing thought that we could have a K-Pop star and Tim Dodd, “The Everyday Astronaut,” live streaming from above the surface of the Moon while NASA is still trying to calculate the maximum intersectionality they can get out of each seat on SLS. Imagine if Musk even beat NASA in completing their prized DEI checklist!

[@jaybodner4189]

Hello 'Tard...NASA has BEEN to the moon! Why do you challenge?? Why can't WE work together for the common GOAL of getting BACK to the moon together!!

[@larrysorenson4789]

The corrupt US government could turn off SpaceX like a light switch.

[@jroar123]

I hate it when someone says mishap. There was no mishap because this was a test best project and although it did not make it to orbit, it did identify several area's of improvement. I'm not holding my breath on the next launch making it to orbit as well. However, if it does make it all the better. So the FAA and NASA need to understand that SpaceX's way of advancement is to building blow it up and build it again. Something that has hindered NASA over the years.

[@pacldawson]

Nowadays, some people’s view of “failure” have changed. I remember Bryant Gumbel asking a NASA official after the Challenger disaster, “so… is this the end of the space program?” What a short-sighted and - frankly - stupid question.

[@Winkkin]

I think Musk used the first launch to dig the hole for the deluge system on purpose. Sped up the process immeasurably.

[@tuberroot1112]

"I hate it when someone says mishap. " It was not intentional but is was not a catastrophe, so mishap seems fair. It is now the technical term used in FAA rulings and assessments, so learn to live with it without trauma.

[@sukumarmondal4260]

The first flight was indeed a success as their main goal was to lift off without blowing

[@TheKevlar]

Hold your breath! Make no mistake this is a space race and the stakes are higher than Apollo...

[@girkgirkus7236]

On one hand SpaceX welcomes NASA money, on the other hand SpaceX is fully capable of landing on the moon without any involvement from NASA.

[@miamianz]

lol guess space x might want to train astronauts then.

[@girkgirkus7236]

@@miamianz NASA definitely brings a level of expertise. But when SpaceX goes fully commercial, they will by default, have their own astronaut program. Also keep in mind that most of Starship flight activity will be fully automated.

[@parajerry]

@@miamianz There are many retired Nasa Astronauts and current ones that would jump at the chance to fly with SpaceX. That's called 'FREE' training for SpaceX. Besides, these are all new systems and no one at NASA has flown them either. SpaceX could probably train them better than NASA anyway...Crew Dragon anyone? Why do people constantly claim that government agencies do it better when they clearly don't when the commercial programs become viable?

[@jaybodner4189]

REALLY McFly...........

[@girkgirkus7236]

@@jaybodner4189 really

[@wadestewart5504]

Tell the FAA to issue SpaceX a 3 year launch certificate and Launch launch launch...

[@menotyou1234]

The level of hate Elon gets from the powers that be resembles what Nikola Tesla got.

[@Hamphield]

Please, don't insult Elon Musk comparing him to that overrated fraud

[@chuckintexas]

... and FOR THE same _reasons_ . Excellent Analogy . Still , as Citizens and as Constituency of Government representatives , its up to US to help them over these hurdles . Its no small THING to overcome the CRONYISM rampant throughout Government , and as such it MY become necessary that WE help Space-X bypass GOVERNMENT involvement - ours or ANY Government's involvement so WE can get OFF our home planet and into the Solar system .

[@damfadd]

​@@Hamphieldyou mean the guy that practically invented the modern world??... might pay to someone homework

[@parajerry]

Anyone that disrupts the powers that be will be opposed. Elon is showing that the people/companies in power now are purposefully complicating and blocking innovation to protect their giant contracts and authority. They can't allow Elon to expose their fraud or the people might turn on them.

[@Jay-uk8uw]

pretty much the same secret government-tied groups are the same problem.

[@davidgutting4317]

I wonder how long Elon will tolerate the FAA politics before he moves his launch site to a country that doesn’t have to subscribe to the FAA oversight. Elon is not known to Suffer an idiot. If the FAA decides to be the problem, Elon has soulitions available to him.

[@BullyDrops]

He will have to follow no matter where he goes. Launches in New Zealand follow FAA. Because it's a American company.

[@kathrynck]

FAA is just the blunt instrument. The 'problem' is people (of particular mindsets) who dislike him buying Twitter.

[@donaldekhoff7999]

Don't be so sure. Rules are made to be broken when needs and conditions change.

[@Mark-jp9dz]

I don't think FAA are the entire problem this time. The EPA are the ones creating the problem.

[@michaeldawson6309]

He could always threaten to launch from China they would welcome him with open arms to get in on the tech.

[@m.micola6181]

It seems they're a bit concerned over Musk's abilities to get things done..faster and better.

[@jaybodner4189]

And that's OK....everyone can LEARN from everyone. So much for the "all-accepting" democrap party.......

[@vincewilson1]

They can't do the 2nd orbital test because they haven't done the first orbital test yet. What Space X did was a test flight test meaning they wanted to fly it through the atmosphere to test various systems. The explosion was not a malfunction rather Space X sent the flight termination command that activated the ship's auto-destruct. This was done after Space X determined that the ship did not achieve the requirements for MECO or Main Engine Cutoff. The tumbling was due to the flight termination system taking about 50 seconds to complete.

[@shawnstephenson50]

The tumble was because an explosion knocked out the computer that controls thrust vectoring and other attitude control systems, the FTS was activated before the tumble yes but it was a combination of not having control and not having enough delta v with the remaining engines that were still lit to make it to orbit.

[@kenfryer2090]

are you mad. the pile of junk didn't work that's why it was terminated. but they didn't even get blowing it up right. a dangerous liability

[@dsquared2586]

Lol, NASA fanboy!! 😂

[@user-ux3fh5tb9p]

😊 nice to read this.

[@davidbrittenham4631]

@@kenfryer2090 You must own stock in Boeing!

[@powelllucas4724]

During the sixties we sent animals, astronauts, and automobiles to the moon. Today, over sixty years later, we can't even decide how, or if, we could do it again. Seems like all we have learned is how to make excuses for not doing something. Sad.

[@Dino_Hunter_420]

Or maybe we never got to the moon, for example nukes on the moon would be able to hit anywhere anything on the earth, doesn’t make sense why pentagon wouldn’t want nukes on the moon ?!

[@Misst2050]

Nukes can already be sent pretty much anywhere on the entire planet.

[@millicentsmallpenny5837]

@@Dino_Hunter_420 not sure why nukes on the moon are going to hit anything anywhere on earth any more efficiently than nukes on earth has been able to do since the 50s. Maybe you could elaborate There is no utility in making a base, transporting all that heavy material to the moon, just to belaborously return it to earth (taking days, instead of minutes) during some unlikely conflict. Gaining nothing whatsoever. (You do realize that this is not some video game, I do hope) New proof man has never been to the moon: If he had been, there would be a pentagon nuke base on the moon!!!!!?? Both of these comments are kind of juvenile. For instance the OP assumes that something is amiss in that we didnt just keep going to the moon (with no particular purpose) just because we did it previously, Back then, the aim was just to prove we could go to the moon. Today that aim does not even exist, because we already did that I guess something is also amiss in that I was in NY in 1992, but have never been back there since. It proves something sensational -- perhaps that I never really were ever there. Very sound reasoning indeed! Too much time spent playing vidgames, perhaps

[@kenfryer2090]

it is expensive and there isn't much of a point to it. they should have a reason like a space station on the moon or mining

[@Muskiehunter92]

@@Dino_Hunter_420 All your comment did was show you have no idea what you are talking about. Why on earth would they put nukes on the moon with no human presence. They can already launch them anywhere they want. Its also not hard to realize we absolutely were capable of reaching the moon back during a time when the US threw everything they had at developing a program to do so. The amount of money, recsources and people that went into the apollo missions is astonishing. If the US put that same effort into going to the moon right now, we could be there in no time flat... but the government has never been so crooked, so I doubt we will ever see it happen. It will be done by private companies going forward.

[@Ryan_Harkin]

The gravy train must be protected at all costs.

[@jmcgregor316]

SpaceX needs to move to a country that appreciates its accomplishments.

[@brownmark8013]

Fly your own Starship assetstore/unity/packages/3d/vehicles/space/starship-launch-212072

[@claude31400]

SpaceX could go to Russia or China .....

[@vidyaishaya4839]

​​@@claude31400no, it couldn't. It could move to Florida, but Puerto Rico is better. Boca Chica is the factory, and test launch facility. SpaceX is already developing a launch pad at Cape Canaveral, where mission launches will most likely happen. Puerto Rico is closer to the equator than both, and not as far away as the Pacific Island territories.

[@parajerry]

Ghana already has the infrastructure and launch facilities. SpaceX could probably be up and running there in a few months.

[@bruceatkinson5357]

If NASA/FAA, etal keeps acting like a boat anchor nthat could happen.

[@ronniebauman28]

Doesn't surprise me. This administration HATES Elon.

[@postsurrealfish]

Having one half white and one half black gives a thermal gradient between the two surfaces under sunlight, with this being able to be utilised for energy. So the paint job might be testing for this.

[@tuberroot1112]

If you are suggesting thermopiles, then you paint it all black. The sun side absorbs a max and the shade side radiates max and gets colder.

[@postsurrealfish]

@@tuberroot1112 I was thinking more along the lines of a Crookes Radiometer

[@chilzone966]

Whether NASA pays for it or not SpaceX is going.

[@donscheid97]

I think NASA would like Elon Musk to be more controllable, now that they have seen how to do it they think others can do it just as well that they will have more control over. they don't like how he does things HIS way. Notice the contracts for future missions with companies that have had zero successes yet and imposing extensive requirements and limits on SpaceX.

[@parajerry]

Can you say, "Blue Origin?" Not a single orbital success and a string of failures from the BD-9 engine to the unworkable lunar lander that will never actually fly.

[@jaybodner4189]

@donaldscheid9647 - You are SOOOOOOOO wrong!!

[@tnguyen9266]

That is essentially what made hi. Successful. He does it his way which is thinking outside the box instead of inside the box. That is precisely nasas problem.

[@richardrigling4906]

SN26 is more likely an orbital fuel depot, which is needed long before an HLS is needed.

[@markeh1971]

Hi, think getting satellites into orbit will be a priority and get valuable experience from launch and re enters. People later once it is refined. Can always build another rocket, losing people could halt or slow it too much. Take care M.

[@dietersoegemeier139]

The ancient SLS rocket can only get 3 people to space where Space X can get 20+ people to the moon every week once the starship is up and running

[@markeh1971]

Hi, early days yet a crewed version or bus version in future, who knows. It’s all possible. Take care M

[@kevincousino2276]

It could in theory, once it can reach orbit, but who is paying for that?

[@scottwendt9575]

@@kevincousino2276Well currently, Elon is. And soon millions of Starlink subscribers will through their monthly service fees and also the Japanese billionaire paying for the Dear Moon Mission.

[@kevincousino2276]

@@scottwendt9575 yes, i know. But with all the R&D and explody rocket tests and normal operatong costs, is SpaceX running at a profit? Has Elon and any investors even seen a return yet?

[@stenkarasin2091]

What we need is John F Kennedy back at the helm, if he could get NASA to ge to the moon in the sixties he could probably get NASA moving today.

[@limey9182]

you will soon realize that 50+ years we have not been back even with all the new tech is because they told us not to come back and by they I mean the ones not from this earth

[@millicentsmallpenny5837]

@@limey9182 Oh, you been smokin that moon cabbage again, havent you? You need to realize that when you are under 20, that crap negatively effects the development of the brain. But it does produce a lot of dumb voters for the Democrat Party, so that is a plus for them I guess!!

[@donaldekhoff7999]

Vivek would be our JFK.

[@toadsauce8091]

I’ll spell it out for you. Once Starship is perfected everyone else building rockets will go bankrupt. That means the greasing of palms will stop and we can’t have that can we.

[@bruceatkinson5357]

Except the FAA has to approve every SpaceX flight. All this speculation doesn't help. NASA/FAA held up the first SpaceX launch. If they keep it up, SpaceX will be taking them to court.

[@lanemedcalf9506]

BINGO!!!

[@Ahmmad_bridge]

SpaceX is focusing on big loads. My understanding is that Companies like Rocketlab are focusing on smaller payloads up to the size of the falcon 9. Other people are working on tickets, vehicles and habitats for lunar and orbital platforms, too. On both sides of the pond.. only America haters would discount SpaceX’s inspiration for the next generation, their achievements, their efforts.. SpaceX made landing rockets a thing.

[@jaybodner4189]

Why do you challenge?? Why can't WE work together for the common GOAL of getting BACK to the moon together!!

[@LeonAust]

I'm not American and Starship has failed@@Ahmmad_bridge

[@leapdrive]

NASA’s contractors are just expensive impediments for the moon landing. We know that after having delayed SpaceX for years, it would be the Starships which will be trucking in the equipment, supplies and building materials for the moon base. SLS and Dinetics just wouldn’t be able to keep up. Furthermore, if NASA really wants an orbiter on the moon, another Starship can be designed to do just that. So the Starship lander will rendezvous and dock with a Starship refueler and then rendezvous and dock with another on moon orbit. It becomes so much easer. NASA and its crony contractors just makes things too complicated. We need to change NASA’s culture when we can ASAP.

[@kenfryer2090]

if I remember rightly NASA has already got people on the moon and very successfully. spacex can't even orbit .. lol

[@leapdrive]

@@kenfryer2090 , that’s because the SpaceX founder wasn’t even born then. Make more sense of your comments please. It’s like asking, “Have you seen India yet? Well Basco de Gamma had a long time ago.”

[@jessepollard7132]

@@leapdrive review your history it was Vasco da Gama not Basco de Gamma.... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasco_da_Gama

[@leapdrive]

@@jessepollard7132 , I didn’t check for the spelling, that’s all. You don’t have to be sarcastic.

[@jaybodner4189]

REALLY McFly...THEN YOU GET It DONE!

[@madmadmal]

Metzger’s statement is misleading. Yes, setting up a mine on earth could take a long time, because a mine on earth is specifically for gathering minerals. A mine on the moon is for creating a habitat which is a far simpler proposition since reaching a mineral is not the goal. Not to say that it is a simple proposition but creating a space with regolith on top may not require creating a void in the ground but a structure with regolith on top. That may mean a starship structure as the basis for the habitat.

[@frankmcgowan9457]

Why bury a Starship? Vertically or horizontally? How would they bury it standing? How would they lay it down without destroying it? How would that crew get home without it? When operational, Starship will be capable of transporting 100T of freight to the moon. If that freight includes an electric D-9 Cat - or a big payloader - and several inflatable habitat modules, cylinders of compressed air, groceries and sundries... Camp can be set up and the crew can retain Starship for their return home. The next crew can bring 100T of different stuff.

[@madmadmal]

@@frankmcgowan9457 This is merely one suggestion and it is a suggestion for a colony. Therefor the ship would be designed for the purpose. I did say habitat.

[@frankmcgowan9457]

@@madmadmal One suggestion. I get it but you must admit it would be an expensive alternative to things suggested by folks in the industry.

[@karlthemel2678]

There is no launcher for the fuel and oxidizer. Right now, the only way to the Moon by Starship is by launching a third stage and a lander into LEO (fully fuelled).

[@jonny555ive]

Question for you, how do you know what Elon has or doesn't have....? How do you know that ? Do you work for SpaceX? Do you work at Boca chica? I'm betting that you don't and that you're just pulling facts out of thin air. Because how could you know...... You can't.

[@johnbrobston1334]

Starship/Super Heavy is the launcher for the fuel and oxidizer.

[@williamsedlock3903]

Honestly this is absolutely disgusting this is what keeps humanity down 👎 there's been too much of a break in pushing technology forward it doesn't take 30 years for each movement ridiculous

[@fukhue8226]

Rapid easy development doesn't build Multi Billion Dollar companies and Rich CEO's!

[@warrenwhite9085]

@@fukhue8226The evil uncaring irresponsible incompetence is NASA, not contractors. NASA selects contractors, contracts, incentivizes, directs, micro-manages them. NASA has screwed up, corrupted every contractors they have had. Thankfully, SpaceX said “FU NASA, we’ll do it ourselves, our way”.

[@richardhamilton-gibbs6360]

It's keeping America down.

[@jbdelphiaiii7637]

I think that the best design for a lunar lander is to put the hab below the rockets, but also integrate the hab with the rover, such that they're all mobile, with little or no need for much in the way of dust collecting lunar suits. Prebuilt dirtcrete 'garages' would be where they would shelter in place when needed during solar SMEs

[@everyangle4310]

NASA is the problem, they out spend SpaceX 5 or 6 to 1 and they're still calling the shots😂😂😂 let's get real, what SpaceX has done in the past 10 years would take NASA 60 years

[@robdedrick2052]

I believe the Paint is for Protection . The paint could reduce degradation of the Heat Resistant Tiles . Especially when half would be exposed to Sun and half to Shade during Daylight Hours . Safety First .

[@StrayCatOR]

Daylight hours, in space?

[@U2EdgeFan]

Great video with substantial information. Thanks a lot 👍

[@johnny555]

Besides money is there anything NASA offers any more? They're like Boeing, can't engineer themselves out of a wet paper bag until somone drops in 100 billion dollars and the bag just happens to rip.

[@kevinbissett293]

Love Your Channel ALPHA TECH. The info You give so complete. Keep doing what You are doing.

[@philippeboisclair4488]

don't forget they also need ship to ship refuling for the HLS so this ship also might not need to came back on Earth so no flap and no heat shield done just keep it in orbit

[@heyovahere-cj4tp]

The bureaucracy/govt. finance thieves getting left behind, GOOD !! ✌️

[@russchadwell]

Hey! My girlfriend managed to somehow get a 10" model of that sleek steel Starship. Even has batteries.

[@johnackley3982]

That model has a vibration during flight.

[@mikewallace8087]

The Starship should have six landing legs not four. Stability of the ship is the concern .

[@andrewhao2675]

I would move the launching area to a neutral area, meaning to international water....to avoid regulations

[@jeremytaylor3532]

If these nose cones, are to be the SLS lander, and moon base structures, they may well leave the heat shield tiles on, for solar radiation protection. In fact they could make the ceramic tile with a different formula to increase the density. Many ceramics had heavy metals and radioactive uranium compounds. By using depleted Uranium they could increase the density without the radioactive component. Most older red brick homes would put out far more radiation. And it would absorb troublesome ions.

[@JeffBrazeel-fe4wc]

First attempt by Starship wasn't a Failure but, a Learning Experience. As Elon Musk has said B4, SPACE is Hard. Which is ALL TOO TRUE, especially with the Rapid Iteration of Starship Evolution/Upgrading/Advancement. SpaceX is under the Microscope due to being the ONLY Domestic Launch Capable/Reliable Vehicle to Lift cargo and Astronauts on the ISS. As well as Developing Starship to Complete the Artemis Missions. Having already Completed the Contract with NASA, and begun a New Contract to Continue to the Future. Actually SpaceX is 95% ready for 2nd Launch. IMHO Booster and Starship are already Stacked and standing on the OLM (Orbital Launch Mount) at this time. SpaceX has already completed the corrective actions but, the EPA is sticking their noses into the mix, causing possible further delays.

[@jonny555ive]

It's our government and their baby NASA trying to stifle SpaceX and Elon Musk...... Because he's going after their sugar daddy. (NASA/Taxpayer money) The sad thing is is our government doesn't like competition. Pretty damn sad if you ask me, standing in the way of science because of money. 👎👎 Of course, that is just my opinion, I could be wrong. (But I don't think I am)

[@bruceatkinson5357]

NASA's antiquated management is THE PROBLEM. They will continue to stifle progress because they have no choice and China will be first.

[@raystevens687]

I wonder if NASA could take the moon dust and compress it into bricks of some or build ram earth house 🏠 I'm not sure if it would work but NASA could come up with some kinda of equipment to do that they build a shelter of some kind to shield the Astronauts from Radiation or even make panels out of the dust.

[@richardnutt768]

SpaceX does not need NASA, NASA needs spaceX. Elon should do it on his own.

[@parajerry]

Hence the probable reason the government and FAA keep throwing obstacles in his way. Gotta slow him down so the money keep flowing to the legacy providers.

[@davidpetersen1]

Nasa is going to "delay" themselves right out of any claim to lunar real estate.

[@jason_m_schmidt622]

As they have done for 50+ years

[@jason_m_schmidt622]

What they need is a national security justification for a moon base. And China will give them that

[@jhendricks203]

Someday we will even explore earth , maybe.

[@MrKen59]

The lack of progress has little to do with SpaceX. With all the issues facing them from lawsuits and regulatory obstacles, I have no idea how anything gets done.

[@parajerry]

Elon's biggest mistake was trying to do this in the USA. He should have based it in some third-world country that would love the money, infrastructure, jobs, and fame that this type of project brings. Ayn Rand was 100% right in her books. The government and bureaucracy cannot allow Elon to progress without bowing down and paying grift to them. This is not a free country and hasn't been for a long time. He would already have Starship in orbit if he didn't;t have to deal with the crazy, unreasonable crap the government keeps throwing at him.

[@ivankent5577]

Pissing off the politicians, including political appointees at NASA & FAA certainly doesn’t help either

[@MrKen59]

@@ivankent5577 exactly

[@Goldengirl48]

​@@parajerryNot only griffers in government are a big problem, the crazy environmentalist and the EPA are the worst about scaring the public about the launching of Starship. They have strange hold the government and especially the FAA. If Cape Canaveral were to try to get approved to launch rockets from the east coast of Florida today, they would shut the whole operation of down because the Cape is situated on and island in the center of an animal preserve. NASA would never be able to get anything done if it was up to the EPA and the rest of the environmental groups. The way it is now, the Cape is grandfathered in to be able to launch when and whatever is needed. They existed before the EPA.

[@gutpunch6724]

Excellent content. Very informative.

[@Omar142118]

Awesome Mr. Casey space kazem fully enjoy your report. Looking forward to your next Amazing report! 👍

[@truthbetold2567]

Once again, Nobody Was Shocked!!!

[@Winkkin]

The problem with Lunar Starship isn't Staeship, its the failure of BE4 and SLS We didn't go back to the Moon because of the impact of social issues. Thats the same thing thats holding up SpaceX. Concerns over sea birds and turtles have no place in discussion about the future of mankind

[@cormackcormack4991]

🤣🤣 do you believe the fairy tale moon landing. NASA haven't been to the moon except area 51 conducted by hollywood 🤣🤣

[@Winkkin]

@@cormackcormack4991 That is some Russian inspired non-sense. It doesn't surprise me that its rearing its head again after 45 spent time in Putin's hammock. Americans did land on the Moon and the Earth is round.

[@Winkkin]

@@cormackcormack4991 p.s. I'm 70 and watched every Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo launch. There is no real question that we landed on the moon just the propaganda of the country that couldn't

[@jamesneary663]

I think people ought to get used to the fact that no one is going to the moon until and unless they can solve the regolith problem. I didn't hear anything that addresses that problem.

[@czjmaster]

To The Moon, Now is The Time🚀🌒

[@RainbowFish-]

The real problem is SpaceX is too cheap for NASA. They will choose a new version of design from the corporate welfare establishment space industry. Blue Origin, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, etc. Nobody ever thinks about how easy it would be for SpaceX to launch 4-5 tanker type refueling tanks/tugs on top of the Falcon-9 or Falcon Heavy. These tanks maybe smaller but could be launched very quickly and turned around and reused. It's up to SpaceX to precede on their own timelines and ambitious endeavors without them.

[@naekosl3059]

ElonX doesn't seem like the person willing to pay bribes to Hunter in return for more NASA contracts. He knows governments and agencies want his services and he's fully booked up. He doesn't need to pay fees or hire lots of government family members in order to get contracts. Although it's probably hard to avoid doing so when they become official government liason employees to SpaceX.

[@jonny555ive]

Very well said..... And you're right, NASA sees SpaceX as a threat..... And you better damn believe that they are. Elon's got it figured out, he and SpaceX are going to far exceed NASA, I have no doubt.

[@hillbillyintheasia6122]

think about for a minute have a liberal democratic running nasa .

[@frankmcgowan9457]

In general, I agree with you. I don't understand why they would want to use Falcon 9 for this purpose, though. Each launch of a Starship tanker is a test flight for SH, SS and tanker mods. Doing those tasks with F9 just cuts back on the potential improvements to SH/SS.

[@TimothyLipinski]

Great video and info ! SpaceX needs the Starship HLS and also a Cargo version and aTanker version. One hundred tonnes of Lunar Water Ice (H2O) will support a Crew of four Lunar Workers on the moon for a year with a tour of duty of six months. Back to the moon to stay and onto Mars and beyond-Ad Astra... T. Lipinski

[@elessartelcontar9415]

Per Aspera

[@bruceatkinson5357]

And for NASA to get out of the way.

[@RickL_was_here]

Ya, having China land on the moon first is a bad idea, you just know they'll fuck up that place as much as they've fucked up this one....

[@gregorycoogle7621]

Blue origin needs to stop their harassment regarding their moon mission… they never built the aircraft as of yet! 😮

[@user-cd4kh5cr9b]

NASA DID NOT declare "No Lunar Starship landing" NASA was NOT shocked The new changes to Starship are NOT related to HLS Clickbait is NOT ok

[@steve5090406]

The nose-cone mockup represents a vehicle similar to Red Dragon, the crewed lunar Starship will separate into two vehicles in lunar orbit and only the top half will land with crew, the bottom half will stay in orbit as a orbiter, the cargo lunar Starship version will land complete. This change will make the Starship more palatable for NASA.

[@frankmcgowan9457]

You might be right but maybe not. If they split HLS into 2 modules, orbiter and lander, the new configuration will require at least one more set of engines (three, total), propellant tanks, pumps, refill facilities, docking clamps and a host of things I haven't thought of... Each additional part is a new potential point of failure with at least one mode of failure. Hence, "The best part is no part." Maybe that mockup is just a mockup of the portion of the vehicle they know needs to be finished out and/or significantly modified. They don't really need a mockup of the main engines and fuel storage portions as the Superheavy will provide information they can use to improve that stuff. Plus, they probably don't feel the need to work 100 feet off the ground when they can just remove that 100 feet of structure, anyway, and basically walk in a few feet above grade. They could be prototyping the nose section for crewed ships as the nose sections will be built prior to being stacked on the vehicle as finished up to the forward dome. Forward of the forward dome is where the differences for each finished type- freight, crew, lander, satellite launcher, tanker - will most likely manifest, anyway. We should expect to see many - perhaps a dozen or more - nose cones being fitted out for different special purpose variants, any of which can be stacked and welded onto the generic Starship "engine and prooellant" section aft of the forward dome.

[@steve5090406]

@@frankmcgowan9457 thanks for your response, the moon Starship does not need to be the one hundred berth Mars Starship, in fact I think it only needs to accommodate 10 crew, so the mockups of the regular Starship do not apply, it should only have half the number of decks and room for propellant storage. The separation point will be just below the line of thrusters, also regarding propellant/accomodations ratio look at the Red Dragon proposal, it was supposed to land and take off from Mars, higher gravity than the moon.

[@bruceatkinson5357]

@@steve5090406 No guarantee SpaceX will be allowed to land on Mars, is there?

[@charliemaynard2554]

Please could you guys do an overview video of all the sites, launch, production, masses, Roberts Road, tile factory, the other launch tower sites etc. What they do and where they are?

[@user-ve4vk5no5o]

LOL, as if SpaceX was ever going to wait on NASA. Sorry NASA It's happening.

[@tomturnbull3723]

It occurs to me that the Starship that has no flaps or heat shield could be their first tanker for orbital fuel transfer to the HLS Starship... thoughts?

[@chrisalbertson5838]

Maybe, but then the tankers can only fly once. They need 10 or 12 trips from the ground to Earth orbit to refuel the lunar lander. Would they waste 12 starships?

[@gregorymurphy5055]

SpaceX should just do their own lunar landing. If FAA keeps trying to block Starship, they should look into launching from International waters.

[@parajerry]

No need. Ghana has facilities and infrastructure already. Just barge the rocket down there and launch. For testing, landing legs and their weight would be a great option to the mecazilla towers.

[@abominabelle]

Finest powder, millions of tons perfectly ready for 3d printed infrastructure.

[@arkangeln910c8]

Studies have shown that magnets can be used in space ships to deflect radiation, in the same way as the earth`s magnetic field. The thing is that iron or other magnets are stronger than the earth`s , so I expect that soon NASA, SpaceX, will device a system to cover areas inside the ship to protect astronauts in long stay in outer space.

[@chrisalbertson5838]

You need REALLY BIG magnets. What we care about is the strength of the magnetic field at a great distance from the ship. We'd need sci-fi level fusion power for that. If you must sheild the astronauts, then use a vest and helmet that they wear full-time. Yes it might be 100 pounds but it's weightless in orbit.

[@vail8150]

The HLS ship can also be equipped to self generate an electro magnetic flux field to reroute cosmic radiation away from the crew

[@lanemedcalf9506]

That sounds really cool! Haven't heard about that anywhere before! That would be awesome if true!

[@BionicBurke]

Yeah... ok... by the time that kind of technology exists in a light and safe enough package to send into space Star Citizen will be out.

[@chrisalbertson5838]

Have you worked out how much power is required to do this? You would need some huge solar arrays. Would those solar power panels by heavier or lighter than HDPE shielding? Once we have portable fusion reactors that can power a city and fit on a small truck, many thngs will be possible. Maybe in 1,000 years. The best idea I read about is placing the crew inside the water tank r using the water you need to take as a shield. The other thing they can do is make the crew wear a radiation sheilding vest. Yes it might weigh 100 ponds but it is weightless in space.

[@StevenRedcay-gw5ci]

There go's Nasa's best chance to get to the moon in there own time-line ! ! !

[@parajerry]

Remember, the real goal is not to reach the moon. It is to pay out large amounts of taxpayer dollars to the old-guard defense contractors and grifters that push the woke, leftist agendas. As long as the money keeps flowing, no one involved cares if we ever actually reach the moon. Elon Musk is about results, and his goal is reaching the Moon and Mars as an affordable cost. He is the exact opposite of NASA and the government.

[@robertmorgan9112]

Nothing says that SpaceX couldn’t land on the Moon as part of its missions! Including manned.

[@picturesalbum4532]

Setting up a Mine on the Moon might be easier then earth no environmental study to deal with !

[@janstahley9762]

Space X just needs to put a few orbits in there then go to the moon on their own, put nasa out of the picture.

[@parajerry]

Exactly

[@WilburBizinMC]

SpaceX didn’t shock NASA

[@SLagonia]

NASA likely assumed that SpaceX would stop their progress during the investigation, but they just kept going. Now they've been told they can't launch, and they just assumed SpaceX would stop then... But SpaceX just keeps going. Can't launch S25? Start shakedown of S26. So they have no choice but to just cancel the whole program. Nothing else is going to slow SpaceX down. But even then, SpaceX will probably just keep rolling until they can do it themselves.

[@jason_m_schmidt622]

NASA needs SpaceX. SpaceX does not need NASA. Understand?

[@ghanova]

Any bureaucrat that claims that Artemis is a viable and affordable launch vehicle is either being paid by snouts in troughs to say that or is just stupid.

[@hillbillyintheasia6122]

think about for a minute have a liberal democratic running nasa .

[@juliancrooks3031]

Starship would better serve in orbit around the moon as a base for landers to dock with for resupply in stead of a permanent space station

[@Dragineez774]

Why not do both? At less than one tenth the price. And be reusable. And carry more payload and more people?

[@chrisalbertson5838]

No. It takes 12 tankers to refuel the lunar-bound starship. This is because Starship is most big steel tanks and huge heavy engine that are not neeed for a space station. Bette to use Starship to launch parts of a station. Using Starship as the station means you are sending 8X more mass then will be used. Also Starship is only cheap if it is reused, Astation-starship would never be reused.

[@albertross2322]

Nelson is a political tool! He's personally worth millions! On a "CONGRESSIONAL SALARY!

[@stumptown]

NASA just needs to stay in their own lane.

[@anthonykeller5120]

The problem with NASA overseeing SpaceX is there is space for graft. SLS/Boeing/Blue is filled with graft; slowing down the process makes sure everyone gets their cut, from Congressmen to people on the ground.

[@perry8498]

Really don’t think spaceX need s nasa

[@aprendiz-sete]

A Spacex precisa ter cuidado com possível sabotagem. NASA e cultura Woke. 😂

[@garysarah.middnightspecial]

When you have a tank in space with flue, is it possible you can fill a space ship. Can you put it in the cargo bay to fly it to space so stay in orbit to stay at the same speed as the earth. In the same place all the time.

[@writheinthedeepfry3859]

We put men on the moon with basically prehistoric tech. Why is it taking such a Herculean effort to even come close to that over a half century later?

[@user-kn5vp2qq6d]

So China or India or Russia will be first on south pool and pick up the lead. For NASA theirs domestic political games are more important.

[@Riteaidbob]

Russia isn't going anywhere.

[@ticklemeandillhurtyou5800]

SpaceX should just go to the moon on their own forget NASA

[@mikewallace8087]

The government is boss to green light Space X missions . If Space X can not convince the F.A.A. of proposed mission safety , they don't go. The F.A.A. wants to reduce the probability of wreckage falling on any populous or harming the environment. The F.A.A. is boss in providing a clear airspace free of commercial and/or private aircraft . Can you dig it?

[@ticklemeandillhurtyou5800]

@@mikewallace8087 then SpaceX needs to take its operation outside United States

[@toadsauce8091]

100% either go to a country that will let you progress or launch from international waters. It’s pretty obvious what’s going on.

[@mikewallace8087]

@@toadsauce8091 That's right , Elon goes home to South Africa and does what he wills .

[@jamesfranqui2660]

Build a launchpad in the gulf of Mexico. Sorta like an oil rig then launch from international waters.

[@NigelDixon1952]

Don't you mean "When NASA finally land a crew on the moon for the first time" !

[@TexanUSMC8089]

If NASA is concerned with the delay of Starship...why don't they stop delaying it. NASA, FAA, and the EPA have delayed Starship launches multiple times. I think establishment aerospace companies have sent lobbyists to politicians, pushing them to slow SpaceX down. Falcon 9 has just about put them out of business. Starship would make them obsolete and irrelevant.

[@toadsauce8091]

🎯 “Starship will make them obsolete”

[@sgfx]

12:50 whether recycling is implemented as a contingency will depend on the exact nature and duration of the mission. For short sorties to the lunar surface with a small crew, it may be an unnecessary complexity when ample consumable reserves can be carried. But for longer-duration missions with more astronauts, recycling becomes vital to reduce the total supplies needed.

[@jaybodner4189]

REALLY KAREN............

[@sgfx]

@@jaybodner4189 I'm sorry, don't get your reference.

[@Study49]

During its maiden launch, Starship lost 8 engines! Is that serious?

[@tuberroot1112]

Bureaucracy will be the death of humanity.

[@themyrrd431]

It piss me off that place like alpha tech use click bait title like " No lunar landing" that's why i gave you thumbs down.

[@jonny555ive]

And that's why they get a thumbs down from me too. The funny thing is, they don't need to do that clickbait bullshit.... It's a pretty solid channel. Pretty decent news reporting..... Although a little behind but I'm sure it takes time to put these videos together so, understandable.

[@joewilson2258]

Does SpaceX use tax payer by the billions to construct their rockets ? No, but nasa does as well as having long delays with mistakes after mistakes as well as costing more money to use older rockets technology.

[@tobyw9573]

Starship "had to be destroyed", not "Starship exploded", implying its explosion was not planned!

[@kkorff]

Behavioral unknowns in space/Lunar environments? Just look at how the crazies act on airlines at only 30,000 ft with 4 hrs flight times.