NASA Will Spend $2,941,394,557 On SpaceX's Massive Lunar Starship Lander!!!

Many people were surprised yesterday when news leaked that NASA was awarding all the funding from the Artemis Human Landing System program to SpaceX with its massive Lunar Starship project. SpaceX's price tag is about $2.9 billion with a commitment to fund half of it themselves. While most space watchers could see why SpaceX had made it to the final round most of us didn't expect it to be the only choice because it was so unlike what NASA was asking for.
However the HLS program only got 1/3 of the money it needed from Congress and with time marching on NASA had to make a decision and the only option with a price tag that fit was SpaceX.
There's much more info in
www.nasa.gov/sites/default/fi...

[@southernbreeze3278]

"this is not going to make many people in congress happy" glad to hear it, must be the right decision

[@konrad6188]

considering the amount of money companies like lockheed martin spend on lobbying US politicians, this i perfectly understandable Means poor senators won't be getting as much funding for their next campaigns when it comes time for re-election

[@zapermunz]

It's their own fault for not giving NASA the funding. Fuck em'

[@infinitehonkworks195]

@@zapermunz if they can't embezzle money from it, congress doesn't want it

[@richardcarlson2644]

Congress is a failed institution!

[@infinitehonkworks195]

@@richardcarlson2644 always has been

[@nagarjunkashyap5987]

I was watching the soyuz MS 18 launch and apparently they have a Russian priest bless the rocket and crew. Now I really want to see Scott going to the first Artremis crew just before boarding Orion and tell them - I'm Scott Manley, fly safe.

[@janpenner2002]

This had me laughing😂😂😂

[@hjalfi]

There's all kinds of weird rituals around spaceflight. The Russians also stop the astronaut bus on the way to the launchpad so the astronauts can pee on the wheels (male astronauts apply it directly, female astronauts bring a bottle).

[@the_senate8050]

Magos Manley, delivers blessings of the Omnissiah onto the holy voidship.

[@rogeriopenna9014]

Fly safe, Kerbals!

[@MrSchloet]

and "Check Yo Stagin!"

[@wecsam]

Congress: cuts NASA funding NASA: chooses the only affordable option Congress: surprised Pikachu

[@nolansprojects2840]

“No, find an option that fits the budget we give you” “why the f*** did you choose SpaceX?!?!” Sounds like the government.

[@dibbidydoo4318]

@Bosingr if our elected officials run an inefficient government, that says something about us.

[@travispluid3603]

@@dibbidydoo4318 Yes, it says that we don't have as much power as they say we do.

[@jannikheidemann3805]

@Bosingr Elect better leaders. If you can't, fix your democracy first.

[@skipperg4436]

@Bosingr people generally vote for whomever TV or mass media tells them to. Humans in general are far to unfit to govern themselves.

[@Kevin-cb9wq]

@@travispluid3603 Not at all. It says too many of us are uneducated and easily led down the rabbit hole. Q? Really? The number of Americans that believe in that obviously made-up nonsense is staggering. In fact, conservatives will believe anything they are told as long as it doesn't come from academia, science, the media (except Fox News), or the opposition party. As a life-long critical-thinker who knows how to create a real logic train, I learned to verify news independently and get a variety of world news feeds so I can cut through the bullshit. Most reasonable Americans are aware of all the disinformation online, and how sensationalist the networks can be, so they take steps to get unbiased news. But not conservatives. No sir. They prefer to inject bleach, or do "fuzzy math", laced with "alternate facts" while they let Fox news drone-on in the background 24-7, slowly brainwashing them with repeated lies over and over and over, until they actually believe it no matter how ridiculous the claim. Sociologists (one of those pesky sciences) are having a field day with all the data they have accumulated over the last year or two with conservatives willing to throw their lives away without even asking for a shred of proof! Good Lord! Darwinism in action!

[@theexchipmunk]

You know? If starship really turns out as planned, there is definitely going to be a running gag for a good amount of time about Starship not actually docking to stations, but stations docking to starship.

[@Dimitri88888888]

Lolol that's gonna be great

[@NashvilleMonkey1000]

So that's how we end up with the "City of a Thousand Planets" on Valerian~

[@ooooneeee]

@@NashvilleMonkey1000 I lovee that Movie. Such a gorgeous location.

[@WrathOfMega]

Why even build the lunar gateway at this point? If starship is bigger than the gateway is planned to be, why not just stuff it full of all of the equipment you were going to put on the gateway and us starship as the station?

[@David-yo5ws]

@@WrathOfMega I'm guessing, but there might already be contracts in place and existing designs certified by NASA and ready to go.

[@zoltanposfai3451]

Elon Musk: "Time to simplify things. Let's dock the station to the lander..."

[@zoltanposfai3451]

@Ankit Meher Glad you caught the sarcasm ;) And anyway. This was about the Lunar orbit docking, not the launches.

[@alexanderea99]

Lol

[@brentgreeff1115]

I wonder if the station could land on the moon? - I am a huge fan of Elon's first-stage rockets returning home - looks awesome - saves money - I get it. - but how can we put people in starship and land it? - I cant see the success rate of those landings going above 95% and that doesnt seem good. How many test landings is starship going to do on the moon before we put people in there? I think when Starship is in lunar orbit they should fit a sled on the one side and it can land like a SciFi movie crash-landing. - When spaceships launch from the moon, they should do it from a big Rail that arcs into the sky, not standing vertically. - Moon's escape velocity is 2.38 km/s - we build trains faster than that. - we need to build a nuclear reactor on the moon to power it - but thats a minor detail. - or a huge solar array might work, if we had a LOT of batteries. -- I think the whole idea of going back to the moon as being an achievement is misguided. - we land - so what...

[@rocketcello5354]

@@brentgreeff1115 please give an example of a train capable of 2.3 km/s

[@shrk128]

@@rocketcello5354 I mean, if you put a capsule on (magnetic) rails, and detonate a nuclear bomb (tactical, not strategic) behind it, all inside a sealed tunnel, and force the blast to the rear of the capsule, technically it'd be a train, and it would probably go faster than 2.3KM/S. It would also be a nuclear people gun. But also a train.

[@LabRatJason]

@11:20 are we just going to ignore the fact that someone put "new raptor who dis?" on one of the engines? I'm dying!

[@muhammadharits7127]

yes that some good humor

[@thesherbet]

yeah all the engines that get delivered at Boca Chica have some kind of meme tagged on them lol

[@eugeneforge]

NASA: We would want to do some experiments while on the moon. How many do you have room for? Space X: All of them.

[@Kevin-cb9wq]

ROFL

[@haydentravis3348]

Empty the tanks, add some airlocks, voila, Moon Base in a can.

[@paullangford8179]

@@haydentravis3348 Keep the leftover oxygen, a few moth's spare might be useful. Just the methane tank is three storeys, lots of space.

[@angerskarin9222]

@@paullangford8179 Or send two ship, one with people in it and one with stuff to make a base.

[@reasonerenlightened2456]

It is funny how we give so much of our taxes for the development of a product which they will be selling back to us. Would the voter ever learn to sponsor the humans, not the private business enterprises. And, if the voter gives money to businesses then shares in those businesses must be obtained too. Where are they planning the testing of the new design for the moon star ship? On the moon? The dust on the moon would cover the entire star ship as it settles. Elon should be preparing money for at least 5 moon star ship prototypes before one of them lands. I am becoming more pessimistic about the entire project , especially, after seeing the crater under the star ship platform. What else did Elon musk not foresee?

[@livethefuture2492]

Not to mention SpaceX has had a really strong relationship with NASA throughout the commercial crew program, and are currently the ONLY company to have ever sent astronauts into orbit.

[@FruitingPlanet]

True, i belive that played a big role besides the budget and capabilities, i mean NASA knows now thanks to commercial crew, that SpaceX delivers and does so faster, more reliable and cheaper then others.

[@tarmaque]

@@FruitingPlanet I think the whole Starliner disaster was also a contributing factor. The Starliner program is being conducted along the same lines as the Lobby Lander.

[@slopedarmor]

@@tarmaque .... lobby lander xD hahaha

[@travcollier]

@@tarmaque Yeah, National Team was very obviously trying to play the political angle. Fair enough, that's how these things have always been done... But it was a bit "saying the quiet part out loud." Overall though... We really don't know which proposal offered the best value. The decision ended up coming down to the fact that SpaceX was the only one which a proposal underneath the arbitrary $ cap. Not a good way to make these decisions.

[@tarmaque]

@@slopedarmor I didn't come up with it. I copied it from another technology channel that I no longer watch because they were too into conspiracy theories. But in this case it's close to factual.

[@oliverlane9716]

This is like sailing accross the atlantic in a small yacht and then using a cruise ship as a tender to disembark in port.

[@ASalishFalcon]

I laughed so much at this...

[@Qwarzz]

Fortunately there are only limited number of Orion flights. Maybe Starship can take over the trans lunar flights at that point as well. It does seem a bit silly for now :)

[@Rmaia3d]

LOL 😂😂😂

[@livethefuture2492]

good for NASA they dont have to rely on politics to keep things going, if SLS and orion don't work out, they'll at least have spacex to use as a customer. just like in the commercial crew program.

[@aleverettes2789]

LMAO

[@RCAvhstape]

Somewhere Werner von Braun is smiling. This is a lot closer to his old Collier's Magazine vision of lunar exploration than Apollo turned out to be.

[@ciromaumrockertdossantos9430]

Totally true. Almost bizarre and outstanding.

[@user-kb8rc5vq2i]

Well, good enough for London, good enough for the moon.

[@BillPalmer]

V2s all the way!

[@user-kb8rc5vq2i]

Once ze rockets are up, who cares vhere zey come down. That's not my department, says Wernher von Braun.

[@Merlinkatamari]

if he would see what musk is doing he would slap him in his face and the space x ceo to

[@OverlordZephyros]

"spacex has a lot of space to expand" Now that pun must be intended ☺️

[@leandrog2785]

SpaceX's SpaceXpansion

[@thefirstsin]

Imma just go past you guys. 🏃

[@InvestmentJoy]

Pretty interested in hearing your opinion. After I saw the announcement yesterday the first opinion I wanted to hear on it was yours

[@vedangsinghal3038]

I watch you channel. Didn't know you were a space fan as well.

[@cursed_train_vids342]

@@vedangsinghal3038 Same here

[@johnabuick]

@@vedangsinghal3038 Baaahahahaha

[@Spedley_2142]

I don't know what it is about Scott Manley but I agree. I think it's because he is obviously highly capable and also so enthusiastic. When I was a kid my homework always got in the way of my hobbies (and vice versa) but I think Scott has that sorted and he does both very well.

[@halnineooo136]

Some see a $3B carrot 🥕, I see a $3B bureaucracy stick in the wheels of Starship development

[@toastrecon]

It's almost comical that the shot of Starship on the Moon looks so much like the old Duck Dodgers and Marvin the Martian cartoons. Amazing.

[@fsmvda]

Elon actually went for that look on purpose! "When in doubt make it look like the Tintin rocket"

[@cidie1]

@@fsmvda Haha that's fun to hear! Tintin was my first thought I love that!

[@richb2229]

Not to mention how much it looks like some of the old 1950’s B-Roll movie space ships, the ones that aren’t flying saucer shape.

[@MostlyInteresting]

Daffy Duck as Duck Dodgers!

[@thomaskositzki9424]

Elon the ultra-nerd right there for you! He did that on purpose, bet on it. ^^

[@antoinelemoine9222]

i LOVE the "Outstanding" on SpaceX Management rating at 10:35

[@IDoNotLikeHandlesOnYT]

The lack of zeroes in the price makes it look like they already know exactly how they're going to spend every single cent NASA pays them.

[@contrapasta2454]

The last 7 dollars is for a packet of astronaut ice cream from the gift shop.

[@pablopereyra7126]

@@contrapasta2454 The last 50 dollars is for buying 2 copies of Pokemon Platinum on Ebay. For research purposes, of course.

[@whatabouttheearth]

Well, it is NASA, they are usually forced to push out pork barrel spending....unlike congress who causes trillions to magically dissapear through pork barrel

[@lostpony4885]

About 50 bux for a starving artist to render a jules verne impression on starship on a moonscape and of COURSE it has those wide legs like a proper golden age sci fi rocket should. Yes the "wisdom" of Starship, at last.

[@jessepollard7132]

Very likely it has been fully vetted for expenses.s I think the award is about what SpaceX has already spent on design/development. So the other half is just construction costs - which SpaceX was going to do anyway.

[@nfoleg]

To see this skyscraper flying to the moon and back in one piece will be extraordinary.

[@ShadowebEB]

Will happen in 15 years optimistically, so don't get too excited.

[@MinerMovie]

@@ShadowebEB I think you'll be pleasantly surprised. But only time will tell

[@ian72marian]

This will fly only to the Moon and Earth orbit, will not come back.

[@madcio]

In currently planned architecture, moonship wont be coming back to Earth. Orion launched on SLS will move people from Earth to Gateway and from Gateway back to Earth. Moonship will launch from Earth, refuels in low earth orbit and then serve as moon lander and launcher - between Moon and Gateway, since Orion cannot do it. Note that starship alone cannot do whole journey, at least in current architecture.

[@sjm7518]

The problem is they haven't presented a detailed plan on how this lander will work. Sounds like it was the only option that fit the reduced budget NASA has. That's the only reason it was selected. SpaceX low-balled that contract. It happens a lot in govt contracting just to get the foot in the door. They just presented what they have. SpaceX is probably shocked they won.

[@Cydonius1]

Starship docking at lunar gateway is like a Death Star trying to dock with an imperial Destroyer

[@RasakBlood]

It looks a little silly. But i think more of the gateway is actual usable space because its the payload parts of several rockets connected together. Most of starship is just tanks. But yea starship is huge.

[@jiraphat2200]

Starship: *complete docking* Lunar gateway: ... Starship: look at me, I'm the Lunar gateway now.

[@nicosmind3]

Ive seen that porn, incredibly accomedating i thought

[@allanchurm]

yep its a bit big ...might as well chuck a gutted starship up there as a gateway instead with attachment

[@DetroitMicroSound]

Wait, I gotta hit the outhouse before we go.

[@Valery0p5]

"Negative mass! That's cool, it flows upward" You killed me 🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@IkarimTheCreature]

floats*

[@cheddar2648]

Negative mass, or, "How Bezos Space Program can make orbit" 😂🤣

[@eugeneforge]

Negative mass...Perfect, we can now start working on that warp drive.

[@u1zha]

There's a bunch of videos by Action Lab about negative mass, rather edutaining, ICYMI

[@adamrezabek9469]

it would be super if it would have negative mass, but so far, it has negative payload

[@LordZarano]

Dynetics and National Team: "We choose to go to the moon, not because it is easy but because it is hard. This will be a monumental endeavour, but with enough investment we may just manage it." SpaceX: "Hey, we're going to Mars. Do you want us to stop by the moon for anything on the way? It's no trouble really."

[@WG-tt6hk]

LMAO

[@kumoyuki]

You're NOT WRONG

[@Well_Edumacated]

EXACTLY!!!!!

[@kendrewcodes9334]

Delete this and post it when starship lands on mars and isn’t just an animation.

[@muhammadharits7127]

@@kendrewcodes9334 chill dude, you can see spacex history, look at falcon heavy they upload an animation for it and less in one year later they have a proper working rocket.

[@liamholland7824]

Looking through the source selection letter one of the points made was that the Starship program was already being funded by external investments and internal profits. It was first being developed to decrease the cost margins on assembling the Starlink constellation (fewer launches needed than F9, etc.) in order to increase internal profits further. Looking at how NASA evaluated it in the source selection, SpaceX said "We're doing this already purely for low orbit operations and then expand from there. We can make you a variant that's a lunar lander and we just need help covering the things that make it different. Doesn't alter our plans, just accelerates them."

[@liamholland7824]

It's also noteworthy that the source selection in the operations section makes note of the fact that astronauts won't be directly involved with any part of Starship until one is fully fueled and readied and won't be relied on to get them back down to Earth. The up and down ride for them is Orion. So that takes a lot of the risk out of the system for the crew other than the Lunar landing itself.

[@livethefuture2492]

yeah, that was one of the points mentioned in the document, i think it said something like half the development costs would be shared by spacex, and that their proposal was the only one that would fall in their budgetary constraints. its also great for NASA in that they dont have to worry about the program getting canceled, if their funding gets cut or some administration change, since spacex is already independently developing starship, and NASA can rely on spacex as a service provider, even if say the SLS or Orion programs were delayed or cancelled. kind of like the commercial crew program with crew dragon.

[@maupach2022]

Exactly, NASA is being extremely smart with this decision, safeguarding the program against political decisions or budget cuts.

[@blackhatfreak]

That's a lie, SpaceX needs the money or Starship won't be finished.

[@sripuranam]

@@blackhatfreak Yes and No. In one of his many social media appearances, Elon indicated that if they did not get the moon lander contract, they would be funding Starship from Starlink profits. Starlink is not yet profitable so they would have slow rolled the program until Starlink stared making money. I think if someone is a savvy investor, they will be on the look out for a Starlink IPO soonish.

[@aplacefaraway]

During the press conference they should say "That's a question best answered using Kerbal Space Program"

[@andythomason5576]

Brilliant man, just brilliant.

[@UberFubarius]

Would be hilarious if that slipped out accidentally.

[@andythomason5576]

@@UberFubarius damn sure would.

[@arushreddi5419]

YOS

[@erilobar9402]

Congress: *gives NASA a severe lack of funds that doesn't let them achieve what they want to do* NASA: *goes with SpaceX, so that Congress can't get the benefits that it wanted from the money it wasn't giving them* Congress: *surprised pikachu face*

[@bilinasmini3480]

The Banana Chips in the background are looking really tasty...

[@pietreks3409]

You think there are no SpaceX shareholders in the congress?

[@dionysus2006]

@@pietreks3409 SpaceX is a private company. Not on the stock exchange

[@MistSoalar]

Congress has money. NASA has brain.

[@TheMrPeteChannel]

@Stal Emperor Elonatine "I'll make it legal."

[@jeffbenton6183]

Congress: "Why are you planning to buy such a big lander?" NASA: "We couldn't afford a small one." (I'm repurposing a Mark Twain quote)

[@nightskydawnnsd5994]

Nice

[@erickperez6348]

😆🤣😂

[@jessepollard7132]

Would you use a vw bug to move a warehouse?

[@timondalton8731]

Scott: The National team's lander was 14 metres tall! SpaceX: Hold my methane

[@MAGGOT_VOMIT]

Elon: "The Runners-Up list will be posted in the Ladies Room." 🤣🤣🤣

[@armandomercado2248]

United Rental will announce franchise opportunities for their new lunar service area. Specializing in 14-meter manlifts.

[@murasaki848]

@@MAGGOT_VOMIT Good Top Gun reference. :D

[@kerbodynamicx472]

I assume its safe to jump from 14 m under lunar gravity?

[@Keldor314]

@@kerbodynamicx472 While wearing a delicate but very bulky space suit? No. There are way too many things in there that can break, resulting in rapid death.

[@pihi42]

And finally, I think the original Von Braun idea was really close to what Starship is. We had to go through the whole Apollo/Shuttle/Orion saga to get back to the Mothership.

[@dandare2586]

Yes it's in his Disney collaboration films. This idea was famously trashed by Mr Houbolt & Apollo worked & was on time because of it.

[@robertfeeley9738]

Yes, I thought about that also.

[@Roboprogs]

It very much looks like a 1950s design in all its art-deco glory. Now just swap out the chemical rocket for a NERVA for the full “Heinlein” treatment 😁

[@wschmrdr]

Funny thing is, there's another KZbinr who was talking about the possibility of doing Earth Orbit Rendezvous with a Crew Dragon, and leaving Moonship to ferry between orbits and the Moon's surface.

[@pihi42]

@@wschmrdr Yeah. perhaps with some optimizations, the "lunar starship" could actually have enough delta-V to go LEO->Moon -> LEO and then refuel. Or perhaps refuel in a higher orbit?... Anyway, the full Artemis stack seems quite ridiculous with Starship as a "lander".

[@teddp]

You tried to put a serious face Scott but it was pretty damn obvious that you actually enjoyed this development. As we say around here even your ears were laughing 😁

[@yansakuya1]

@Optical Clarity I mean even if it is unintentional, but if Elon Delivers then credit will still go to the Dems for screwing orange man and then accidently allowing the US get to space because they force NASA to choose SpaceX with budget cuts.

[@CryptoTonight9393]

11:21 the "new raptor who dis?" Cracked me up.

[@wanderingcousin]

SpaceX was going to develop Starship with or without NASA, so any funding they get from this program is a bonus. Because of that, they can be flexible on costs.

[@f.w.1318]

That’s it right there it’s getting built privately, NASA is just another one of the investors, the plus side to this model it eliminates the politicians from the equation, no lobbyist to pay either for congressional money for them to pocket.

[@adorabasilwinterpock6035]

This isn’t a starship though, it’s very heavily modified and built specifically for nasa for the moon

[@kneekoo]

@@adorabasilwinterpock6035 That's still a Starship. They will have multiple non-Lunar Starship models anyway, because they need some for cargo, some for human flight to orbit and beyond, others for Earth to Earth missions, others as tankers, and who knows what else. So the Lunar model will be just one of the many models they make. The good thing is they've streamlined their development process pretty nicely so far, so they will pull it off with that budget, unlike the others who wanted more.

[@kazedcat]

Adora Basil Winterpock Spacex is currently testing new modified versions of Starship every month. Stainless steel allows you to just weld your modification to the base structure.

[@wanderingcousin]

@@adorabasilwinterpock6035 Sure, but consider the scope of similarities. They need to develop life support systems, airlocks, elevators. The main differences are the new thrusters, removal of flaps, new landing legs, and flight software updates. There's still a ton of common work to be done.

[@Jakilla69]

Imagine the levels of redundancy you could reach if instead of lunar gateway you just have 10 lunar starships docked together in orbit.

[@gaestroorly4668]

Sounds like Skylab

[@livethefuture2492]

@@gaestroorly4668 yeah i remember that skylab was actually refurbished from an empty saturnV tank.

[@tarmaque]

@@livethefuture2492 Skylab was enormous compared to the ISS, but it was also not as flexible. It could have been a great thing, but it had several problems initially and deorbited before the Space Shuttle was available to lift it back to a usable orbit. There were even plans for a second Skylab (Skylab-B) that was in essence identical, but it was considered too expensive due to the cost of the Saturn-5 booster necessary to lift it. Today, once Superheavy is up and running, we can start thinking of larger and mover versatile space habitats. In 10-12 years we could see hub Starship variants surrounded by ten or more spoke Starship variants with the ability to house hundreds of researchers in orbits between or even beyond the Earth/Moon system. Or at lest the beginnings of such a program. I think this is far more important than flying Elon Musk to Mars. _Edit for spelling_

[@Jacob-yg7lz]

At that point you could just make a ring of them and make it into an artificial gravity gig

[@lordgarion514]

@@tarmaque Umm, the ISS is several times larger than Skylab. I think you mean Skylab is much larger than any single unit on the ISS. ISS 43,000 cubic feet. Skylab 11,290 cubic feet of habitable area.

[@marthinneillapoimichael2495]

Dynetics and Blue origin: traditional LM SpaceX: a literal tower

[@FirstLast-uz6eq]

SpaceX took a gun to a knife fight.

[@paullangford8179]

@@FirstLast-uz6eq A howitzer.

[@rocketmanfossel1174]

@@FirstLast-uz6eq Schwerer Gustav

[@nothereanymore3941]

Man, I still get the chills whenever I see that shot of starship swinging around for the landing, it looks so unreal

[@leonardgibney2997]

Most manned space flights outside LEO look unreal to me.

[@bustedshark5559]

If Bezos really wants to get some equipment on the Moon before the end of the decade, he can always book cargo space on Starship!

[@thomaskositzki9424]

XD XD XD

[@Skinflaps_Meatslapper]

If he wanted to do that, he shouldn't have been screwing off the past decade or so with his model rocket hobby down in Van Horn.

[@thomaskositzki9424]

@@Skinflaps_Meatslapper Bezos is the worst try-hard I've ever seen. XD

[@throwback19841]

He could always use his own money. He's got enough. $3B is a fraction of Jeff Bezos' worth, even after his divorce.

[@compelledpluto]

If he was smart he’d merge blue origins with space x and become a big investor and boost progress

[@yanislahtal6253]

Tbh 2.9 billion is only a fraction (about 1/50th) of the development cost of the f-35...

[@calistohuettich]

Wow, that is crazy

[@Oxygentleman]

america moment

[@mrfisher1072]

F-35 has been an embarassing development.

[@Torjus_]

Programs like the F-35 development aren't made to be efficient at all, just keeping jobs going for as long as possible.

[@Najolve]

So does that mean we can scrap the F-35 since it sucks and get 49 additional lunar-landers instead? I really wish life worked that way sometimes...

[@christopherbeddoe406]

The scope of SpaceX's goals dwarfs everyone else's. It's very exciting to see an organization reaching for the stars again and succeeding. It's very refreshing to see their extreme levels of transparency and it is breeding a whole new generation of space enthusiasts.

[@WG-tt6hk]

SpaceX has made "space" fun again.

[@apassionatenerd.3564]

I hate that one company is monopolizing space already and everyone is one board with it because the government isn't doing anything with space travel.

[@Tiigerr]

@@apassionatenerd.3564 Not their fault they're lightyears ahead of anyone else. What are they supposed to do, wait? And what are we supposed to do, not want them to succeed and expect them to wait? SpaceX welcomes competition if you've ever heard Elon talk about it. That was actually one of the fundamental reasons for creating the company in the first place, to inspire others to take this on. But everybody else has ended up too slow, too incompetent, or not pushing the envelope enough compared to SpaceX, so that's that.

[@WG-tt6hk]

@@apassionatenerd.3564 Hey , if Space X is racing ahead of everyone else do you expect them to stop and let those with no vision catch up ? It's called competition, and if you can't play the game, don't get on the field.

[@haydentravis3348]

@@Tiigerr And the whole point of them doing things out in the open. They broadcast all their launches specifically to inspire competition. It is truly a shame that nobody else is competing on their level, but it's certainly not SpaceX's fault.

[@FUBBA]

Let's just keep our fingers crossed for James Webb and hope for no more of these engineered setbacks.

[@TheNefastor]

That telescope has been in the works for so long, at this point I'm expecting it to fail spectacularly and possibly kill NASA's reputation in the process. Even though I'm desperately hoping it works flawlessly. But they did manage to screw-up with Hubble and it was a far simpler telescope, so I'm not very optimistic.

[@FUBBA]

@@TheNefastor Nah be optimistic! This is too important to fail. If it does the world will keep on trying.

[@skipperg4436]

Launch Gods will accept this humble sacrafice

[@human9458]

Tbh, I don't mind the delays for JWST. Just make sure everything and boy I mean everything is working perfectly before they launch it. Because if something goes wrong after the launch, there's no way they can fix it in orbit like what they have done to Hubble

[@BrotherAlan]

Two astronauts in a 5+ level, 9m diameter, Starship. They will need a map not to get lost inside it.

[@jonbong98]

It's ridiculously small but this is for a proof of concept mission, and things will certainly change before this sketched mission fly's.

[@ampeyro]

No need to build a habitat when your ship is already the size of a building, I guess.

[@jonathanodude6660]

@@jonbong98 small?

[@carso1500]

@@jonbong98 SMALL? This shit has more internal volume than a fucking 747

[@GeekyBrian96]

@@carso1500 more then the iss to lol one launch and boom new biggest station

[@Milk-ew4pf]

Congress: you will only get 1/3 of the money you need Nasa: Choses cheapest option, SpaceX Congress: why did you do that, all my lobbyists are unhappy! Edit: Grammar

[@NemoConsequentae]

Congress: you will only 1/3 of the money you need Nasa: Choses -cheapest option- _only option it can afford,_ SpaceX Congress: why did you do that, all my lobbyists are unhappy! FTFY!

[@TexanUSMC8089]

You nailed it. LOL

[@chrismorrow5959]

Gotta love it when they shoot themselves in the foot

[@awsumguy-bh9pz]

i dont get why congress gives no moneys to nasa when there are billions of dollars worth of money in asteroids out there. bruh

[@verticalfracture]

@@awsumguy-bh9pz that paradigm will flip as soon as starship and its derivatives make mining financially viable.

[@rob_i208]

2:04 My experience in Kerbal Space Program tells me that Starship will tip over about .03 seconds after touching the lunar surface.

[@poretraszmay4826]

+1

[@jessepollard7132]

Nope. IT would be quite stable.

[@owenclark7210]

I think part of the reason SpaceX can do it cheaper than the others is because they have always had the goal of going to the moon and beyond, so they've already done a lot of the development needed for this venture. They also have a lot of income from their highly successful Falcon 9, with it's reusability significantly reducing the cost-per-launch. It will be interesting to see how well Starship performs when it is scaled up from its current size (all propellant/no cargo to half and half)

[@thierryvt]

11:22 on the leftmost engine: "new raptor, who dis?" lmao, someone has a sense of humor at spacex

[@user-lv7ph7hs7l]

They've been adding jokes to that manifold cover for a good 10 engines now. There's a few good ones :)

[@jw33]

"Hi Fred"

[@Valery0p5]

OwO, who's this?

[@user-lv7ph7hs7l]

BTW the one with dogecoin dog is probably the one that exloded on SN11 blowing the vehicle apart.

[@hh9852]

If there is one thing KSP career mode has taught me, it's that it doesn't matter how stupid the thingy looks like, as long as it does the job and is within cost, part-count and tech limits...

[@youkofoxy]

As long as it does the job inside mission paraments.

[@hawkdsl]

That's exactly how the LEM ended up looking like it did. We are used to that moon lander, but when it was first seen, people were like WTF is that.

[@edd4816]

@@hawkdsl The lem was such a sketchy looking thing, but it worked and that's what made it beautiful

[@mikemike974]

'Spacex have not completed a full landing cycle' That got old fast

[@maxqueue5211]

not on the moon anyway. Nobody has landed people on the moon since 1972.

[@dean._.0.0]

I feel like Blue Origin thought they’d win easy just because of Amazon and Lockheed lobbying

[@00HiGhGuY00]

It'll be like a cruel prank to the astronauts that take part in the Artemis program. They'll spend days in a capsule getting to the moon, then they'll transfer to a tiny -house- space station probably for a day or two, then they'll get into a "lander" that is bigger than the vehicle they flew from Earth in, and bigger than the "space station" to go down to the moon realizing how much better they'd have had it if they just left Earth in the Starship to begin with.

[@bhaskararaka]

if this is what it takes to normalize Starship, hey, I’ll take it

[@My-nl6sg]

imagine if your lander carries more mass than your launch vehicle

[@raifikarj6698]

No it makes more sense, do you know how they get starship lunar Lander to the moon with that such mass ? by refueling it in space multiple time, probably 5+ times. It was dangerous if something bad happen in refueling you don't want in there when that happen. if there is a problem astronaut will have problem to escape especially Starship Lunar lander is not designer to survive re entry to earth. So by using Orion it will make the journey seamless for them no waiting in refueling. It will be like astronaut taking a taxi to harbour to aboard Cruise ship

[@maxinator2002]

In a weird way, it’s kind of like how a road trip goes: travel in a cramped car for a while, then arrive at (relatively) spacious hotel room.

[@ImieNazwiskoOK]

@@raifikarj6698 Astronauts could board Starship in LEO after refueling, then they would go and Orion will wait in LEO

[@wintrparkgrl]

Spacex winning it wasn't surprising, what was surprising is that they didn't accept a backup like Scott said

[@fallencrow6718]

Well to be fair spacex has to much chad energy, blue origing just looks sad next to it.

[@Rmaia3d]

No funding available for a second, backup, option. If Congress adds more, then maybe...

[@livethefuture2492]

they didn't have the funding available to choose 2 proposals as originally intended, as their budget was reduced.

[@jgottula]

Actually the lack of a backup is very very unsurprising in the context of Congress’s complete limp-dick response to NASA’s pleas for landing system funding. What’s perhaps more surprising (or maybe just hilarious) is the outraged response from Congress representatives: i.e. the very people responsible for the totally unworkable budget NASA is being forced to deal with here. What the fuck were they expecting NASA to do, exactly? Make money appear out of thin air?

[@jaceksiuda]

Something tells me, that now Congress will find enough money to allow funding of the second contender... :D

[@vgfxworks]

It's funny to think that when people first imagined landing on the moon, they imagined a rocket, just like the starship. It is part of the human imagination and dreams, it is incredible that it is on it's way of becoming a reality.

[@user7966]

i mean elon a bit of a con man, but i do think nasa pick the right one for sure here, the other two has major problems with there designs and since they have the falcon, they can use that to generate cash for starship.

[@leonardgibney2997]

Don't count your chickens

[@joelmoses2599]

With Space X's ship you can use a lot of the old movies from the 1950's.

[@haydentravis3348]

@John Galt Imagine being told you're the best in a field, only to have that field turned upside down and all your experience turned to ash. It boils down to immaturity and inability to cope.

[@kaitoch.2969]

National Team: Very Good Dynetics: Very Good SpaceX: *O U T S T A N D I N G*

[@TechyBen]

Dynetics is what we all build when low on parts, science and tech in KSP. XD

[@allanchurm]

@@TechyBen which one of them used kerbel space to develop there space bid then ??

[@yondaime500]

"SpaceX wins. Fatality"

[@livethefuture2492]

that was in the Management and organization category, where they mention SpaceX's past experience with NASA's commercial crew program and their crew Dragon spacecraft, and how SpaceX has proven their operations in many ways, and that NASA has been satisfied with their organization so far.

[@TechyBen]

@@allanchurm All of them. SpaceX plays with explosions like KSP and has the full tech tree. National Team has mid tech and lots of planning with rendezvous and orbital docking and refuelling. Dynetics is new to the game, and messed up their DV for landing!

[@hooskidoesminecraft6807]

Watch one of the starships have issues, with the decent stage or engines while on the lunar gateway and they just decided “fuck it, it’s an EXPANSION now”

[@hydrolox3953]

Xd

[@limiv5272]

If that happened, Gateway would be an expansion of Starship

[@sharpfang]

Seems a lot like my stations in KSP. A ship not meant for reentry, returning from Duna? Permanent piece of space station. Rescued kerbal in a rover cockpit? Kerbal lands with the nearest return crew, truck cockpit becomes a new cupola. Launcher happened to have too much delta-v and arrived at the station on 2nd stage, before departure to Minmus? 2nd stage becomes a tank extension to the station. Spaceplane lost vertical stabilizer on ascent and is incapable of reentry now? What a cool-looking expansion for the station!

[@gildedbear5355]

@@sharpfang You never get Kessler Syndrome if all of your space junk is all bolted to each other? 8D

[@josephburchanowski4636]

@@gildedbear5355 Just shoot it with a missile. WW 3 will be a hell of a Kessler syndrome.

[@Kimballgoss]

Really good coverage of the event Scott! I came expecting fair and balanced analysis of all three options, and good explanations of why the decision was made... and that’s exactly what I got! Good stuff. Keep up the good research and hard work!

[@andrewdoesyt7787]

If you think about it, that’s less than 3 days of the military budget.

[@armandomercado2248]

"How does Starship integrate with SLS? That's a question best answered in Kerbal..." Classic.

[@futurist4453]

Starship, SLS, Falcon 9, Falcon Heavy all combine at once and you'll get a very cursed space ship. Oh great Idea! Scott please make video about cursed rocket history

[@CoryMcCarvilleSchueths]

Shelby's retiring next year, SLS's days are numbered- especially if Super Heavy and Vulcan Centaur beat it to orbit- no lobbyist bribery can save it. With this HLS decision, NASA created a difficult situation for meddling senators, as well as another nail in SLS's coffin. Gravy train can't continue forever...

[@livethefuture2492]

@@futurist4453 i can imagine an SLS core stage with falcon9 side boosters, truly a monster of a cursed ship.

[@juanfacundoechenique4688]

​@@futurist4453 Imagine an SLS core as the first stage, with Falcon Heavy as boosters, and the Starship as the second stage.

[@ImieNazwiskoOK]

In theory by mass only you could put empty Starship in LEO using SLS Block 2

[@JohnTrustworthy]

Let's be real. The only reason they didn't choose blue origin is because you can't use the toilets on the lander unless you are from upper management.

[@TheNefastor]

Ouch ! Too real ! :-D

[@Bramon83]

And the govt isn't a prime member.

[@roywhiteo5]

starting pay for a blue origin astronaut is 15$/h

[@parajacks4]

@@roywhiteo5 To be fair, they need to get to space to be astronauts

[@nobilesnovushomo58]

a fellow WH40K lover, I see.

[@lagunamoto8032]

The fact that blue origin was even included in the consideration blows my mind.

[@annoyedwalrus7803]

It's not too strange. "The National Team" consisted of, among others NorthropGrumman, the company that designed the original LM (it was Grumman that designed it NorthropGrumman was created in 1994 after a fusion with Northrop). The other companies in "The National Team" are also very experienced. I love space exploration and I am amazed by what SpaceX has accomplished but I find the fanboyism by Musk-fans really annoying.

[@TaeSunWoo]

Scott Manley: one of the few youtubers where auto generated subtitles are at least 80% correct

[@JackieWelles]

This amazing news because it gives higher chances for continuously occupied Lunar base, instead of: We came on 1 billion/ flight rocket, we saw, will be back in 60 years again.

[@ThisNoName]

Nobody want playback of 1960s in glory 8K

[@WilliamDye-willdye]

I've advocated a continuous tele-operated robotic lunar base for a half century. Slow and clumsy, sure, but we could've done a lot of construction over the last five decades.

[@IamINERT]

@@ThisNoName fr. We need starwars

[@ThisNoName]

@@IamINERT Skynet is in the making, starship is coming along ... we are almost there

[@leesargent5947]

This option actually allows for reasonable trips to the Moon. SpaceX has a growing record of working toward the goal quickly and can change when better approaches arrive. SpaceX being on budget. SpaceX being responsible. SpaceX being more visible about their accomplishments and failure. Why would politicians like it.

[@zerothcore3220]

11:21 lol i love how someone wrote "new raptor who dis" on the pipe cover🤣

[@thomaskositzki9424]

Well, you cant tell it's an Elon Musk Company! ^^ Just think of SpaceX's ASS-rule: Acronyms Seriously Suck. That was the name of an email Elon personally wrote, in which he forbid acronyms... (short version) ...as they complicate training of new personel (which has to learn all them stupid acronyms) many times harder than it needs to be. ^^

[@BnORailFan]

Good catch. I like the photo of the sign on the fence too: No Trespassing, Raptors Loose

[@Usstampchannel]

@@thomaskositzki9424 That's an interesting management approach. It explains a lot. It's not just them trying to keep things fun, there's something really to it.

[@blobman1238]

Lolll xD

[@Verrisin]

@@Usstampchannel To Elon, memes are not just for fun. He is *using* them for their power. - Let's not forget, that for example all religions are memes* and they are extremely powerful. (* original meaning of the word, but the meaning never left)

[@robst247]

Those new Raptors on the flatbed are a plumber's nightmare if ever there was one.

[@kenoliver8913]

ALL liquid fueled rockets are plumber's nightmares. Full flow staged combustion (the Raptor's design) should actually be simpler plumbing if anything.

[@cujet]

I woke up the other day and for the first time, I actually thought this might work! Go SpaceX!

[@heartofdawn2341]

"Of course we can't give you any more money for the HLS, we're far too busy shoveling pork onto the SLS. Here, take this pittance." ... "You bought what!? What do you mean that's all you could afford?!"

[@coolfred9083]

@Ankit Meher Yeah it is a lot of money but their comment still applies, it is all they could afford.

[@dmurray2978]

NOOOO THAT'S ISRAELS MONEY /s

[@coolfred9083]

@Ankit Meher Yeah, it is right. It literally is, as far as I am aware that's simply a factual statement. What are you on about?

[@RamblingRodeo]

Right, SLS is a money pit!

[@johnspencer3994]

sls is no bigger scam than musk's bull$#!+

[@komitadjie]

I love that if Starship performs as advertised, you could probably carry the other landers *along with* the Starship, and drop them off as cargo. Heck, this will probably be the first space mission with astronaut personal mass allowance measured in *tons*.

[@JustCoNa]

Yeah it's no joke, it makes permanent lunar bases a real possibility

[@My-nl6sg]

they could bring their Cybertruck along lmao

[@nathanb011]

@@My-nl6sg if you're talking Tesla, the semi could also fit. Fully loaded.

[@ImieNazwiskoOK]

@@My-nl6sg If I remember Elon once said that he wants to turn Cubertuck into human Mars rover. Durable-yes Air filtration (which could be turned into life support)-yes Electric (no need for air)-yes Also in many fan made renders Cybertuck is used for scale and for measurement (damm Americans! They use everything except metric!)

[@tankpenguin175]

@@ImieNazwiskoOK Cooling would be a huge problems though.

[@MonstoyGuitar]

With the recent success of starship's landing, definitely a good move by nasa. We'll be colonizing the moon by 2030 and mars by 2050.

[@hououinkyouma5372]

Actually the program has frozen due to the competitors protesting NASA's decision, since NASA previously claimed that they'd fund 2 winners. Fortunately, this doesn't halter starship's development, since SpaceX is funding it on its own.

[@Bramon83]

Not even

[@killian9314]

i doubt there'll be a permanent mars colony in a few decades, safest bet is a rotating crew prescense in the moon given it's closer

[@greensky01]

@7:18 if you look closely at the Starship you can notice that the thrusters used to ascend and descend are now positioned in a circular pattern around the circumference rather than the old four-sided thrusters.

[@joenefflen845]

Haha, almost every contract award I have been a part of has been announced on a Friday. The government people drop it and then run to the door so they don't have to deal with the fallout until Monday.

[@aviovintage]

Haha, I can imagine the scene. All the people gathered (coats and bags at the ready) around the one guy who then clicks on "send" and they all sprint to the exits. Byyyyeeeeee!

[@commerce-usa]

RFP 101.

[@jonathanfairchild]

Actually true lol

[@sock2828]

I've even seen people in the Bureau of Land Management or Fish and Wildlife do it.

[@ssjwes]

By monday it's old news. That's why they always put out stuff they don't want to talk about on fridays.

[@EvelynNdenial]

the politicians fuck around with the budget then complains about the consequences. i do love the dynetics lander, it's almost exactly what my first ksp lander looked like.

[@Raymorx]

Ok

[@JackieWelles]

Politicians have zero idea about rockets and economics. All they care is if the rocket is big enough ? Can those politicians be re-elected if they fund it ?

[@livethefuture2492]

lobby lander(national team), i'm glad they didn't win, great job to SpaceX, for once politics didn't ruin everything.

[@ThisNoName]

@@livethefuture2492 Not yet ... Monday is fast approaching ...

[@hydrolox3953]

My first ksp munar lander looked like a very downscaled expendable starship

[@kwask]

I completely agree that I think we'll look back on this as the beginning for a new age in human spaceflight. If we can get a heavy launch / lander vehicle like starship figured out, that gives us a lot of room to do much bigger stuff in space (both figuratively and literally).

[@frankgulla2335]

Thanks for the update.

[@moonshine7753]

I'm sad for Dynetics because their lander was so cute :(

[@bahayesilyurt9433]

those rabbit ears

[@eliyasne9695]

When the three options were revealed, i was sure Dynetics would win...

[@stainlesssteelfox1]

From a functional point of view, it was the best suited to the mission requirements. Starship is overbuilt for the purpose, like using a semi-truck to go camping when you need a 4 wheel drive off-road vehicle. Don't get me wrong, I like SpaceX and Lunar Starship would be ideal for supplying and expanding an existing base, with a hard landing pad and LOX propellant production so it would only have to carry enough LCH4 for the round trip and could re-fuel on LOX locally. But for the initial missions, it's fitting the vehicle to the missio0n, rather than the other way round.

[@shawndavis779]

@@stainlesssteelfox1 "Starship is overbuilt for the purpose, like using a semi-truck to go camping when you need a 4 wheel drive off-road vehicle." I understand the sentiment. But given a set budget for equipment, it's better to use a semi-truck to go camping than a 4-wheeler to haul a trailer.

[@stainlesssteelfox1]

@@shawndavis779 One thing I didn't reallise was that the Dynetics lander was over-mass. After listening to the whole video, I'm less conflicted about the SpaceX lander. Assuming it can be built at all (which I'm confident it can, just maybe not about the current timescale of July 1st for an orbital launch), it may well save the Artemis program.

[@domoredujordan]

"Noooooo you can't just keep awarding SpaceX! You have to give us money for pork barrel programs!"

[@trinalgalaxy5943]

you must funnel money into our projects that after trillions in overruns and years wasted have next to nothing to show for! - congress.

[@stevenson720]

Spacex are breaking the rules. Your supposed to take the money, then explain how difficult it is and the ask for more money. You just do this after every election cycle so your talking to new people. You can't actually do anything, that's just ridiculous.

[@BrokenLifeCycle]

"Haha, Starship go BRRRRRR."

[@tma2001]

actually I thought National Team would win because JB would offer to fund any budgetary shortfall out of his own pocket - can't believe they were the ones who wanted lots of dosh upfront!

[@livethefuture2492]

@@stevenson720 SpaceX: lol, i'm too busy revolutionizing the space industry, there's far more money there than in any government contract! seriously though SpaceX will soon surpass even NASA's budget, and their innovative edge puts them far ahead of all other competitors, so they'll have no problem dominating the space industry. they're here for the long term, whereas these lobbyists are just there for short-term profits.

[@johneagle1855]

I love the Comparison render. Gives a a grasp of size.

[@chrisreyes3126]

Thank you for the great video!

[@wilburt6131]

The absolute cheek of blue origin bidding for a lunar lander when they haven't even reached earth orbit is astounding.

[@Pretagonist]

Yeah, Bezos has to have some really good friends over in the military industrial complex. Otherwise I have no idea why a small space tourist outfit with zero orbital class vessels or engines are getting a seat at the big boys table.

[@2hedz77]

but they were only 1 of a team with Lockheed Grumman Draper

[@seanfyodorovich5230]

@@2hedz77 Exactly. Grumman is the ONLY company to have ever built something that landed people on another world. Musk has only accomplished what the Russians did 60 years ago. Big deal.

[@tarmaque]

Even worse, the US military is giving them launch contracts before they've even seen a partial launch vehicle. I'm still baffled by that.

[@steveh1792]

@@seanfyodorovich5230 Except for the reusable launcher part...

[@raideurng2508]

The shuttle was also a monster of a craft and dwarfed the early ISS. But... it worked.

[@AlexandreSk]

Low orbit vs the moon.

[@vulture4117]

true... shuttle is actually somewhat similar in size to starship

[@X8X8X8X8X8X8X8X8X8X]

it kinda worked

[@raideurng2508]

@@Comical1984 It also hauled most of the ISS.

[@markhorton3994]

Barely.

[@huannguyen6496]

Hi Scott. I am a first-time viewer. great show. thanks. I love your props, where did you get them. Appolo set up?

[@thethirdman225]

That was the most enthusiastic "fly safe" I've seen for a while!

[@robotpirateisland3430]

So happy to see spacex win. You just know that the blue origin's solution would have been ridden with delays, cost overruns, rich defense CEOs lining their pockets with NASA money all over again. Hopefully we get to see some real innovation now :)

[@blackhatfreak]

I don't SpaceX is going to kill people, and lol oh man you're an idiot.

[@zacharyhutchison4006]

Inb4 they land someone on the moon by 2024 with or without Artemis. If for no other reason than to spite what Eddie said.

[@edwardboatman4554]

@@blackhatfreak And your proof of this is.....?

[@Donut0389]

@@blackhatfreak And the basis of your opinion is?... Bear in mind three things: 1) SpaceX has already put people in space with Crew Dragon. They're set to do it again next week. 2) Starship won't have any manned flights until they successfully put it into orbit and safely return it multiple times unmanned. 3) Lunar Starship right at the concept phase is in a better position than Mars Starship. Of the four failed Starship tests thus far, only one has been caused by engine design failure. The other three failed because of systems required for the belly flop maneuver. Guess what Lunar Starship has no need for? It will never re-enter a Planets atmosphere and thus doesn't need sea level Raptor engines, nor header tanks, nor fins, nor heat shielding, and will never have to re-light engines while pulling high-g near a planets surface.

[@Unmannedair]

@@blackhatfreak and how many people has a SpaceX system killed so far?... Let me count... Zero. And how many people have died on Northrop Grumman, or Boeing, or Lockheed Martin systems? I think somewhere in the neighborhood of about 19 people? Yeah, I'm beting on SpaceX.

[@rustyfox81]

The Dynetics proposal looks like an Apollo 50th anniversary historical reenactment society submission !

[@diegoiunou]

I guess you mean "blue origin" (which actually looks like that car Homer put together for his brother)

[@izibane9295]

To me, it looks like a stock ksp moon lander

[@lustfulvengance]

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣👍👍👍👍

[@HelloKittyFanMan.]

It's the National Team's that looks like that.

[@-M0LE]

😂ikr

[@Ahldor]

Thanks, answered alot of my questions!

[@Byefriendo]

9:13 "actually flies" >shows starship undergoing rapid unscheduled dissasembly

[@ovidiulu]

"dissimilar redundancy" are my favorite words for this video

[@TheNefastor]

As an aerospace engineer, I've had to implement those words into hardware. I do not like them at all. Just because safety and good sense demand it, doesn't mean you can achieve it (let alone stay within budget in the process).

[@ovidiulu]

​@@TheNefastor Isn't that supposed to be the fun part of engineering? :) It is for my modest electronics engineering ...

[@TheNefastor]

​@@ovidiulu not when you're at the cutting edge, and there's only two different manufacturers for, say, a processor, and one of those two will not allow their products to be used in any equipment where failure could cause someone's death... leaving you to have to tell your boss : "we can scrap the project or we can forget support from the CPU manufacturer, those are our only two options". Been there, done that, got called incompetent, sued my employer, won, acquired a reputation for not taking shit from anyone. Meanwhile the project I was working on end-up delayed ten years and counting. There's been too much consolidation in some industries. We're at the point where you may not be able to create two different systems that do the same thing because there aren't two comparable parts manufacturers you can select. And that doesn't even take into consideration the logistics aspects, for example : most companies do not want to be dependent on a single source for any part of their product. That means you need to write a f***ing essay and lawyer it up whenever you need to sell your hierarchy on the notion that they need an Intel processor even though Intel processors are only available from Intel. For me, the fun part of engineering is R&D and prototyping. Everything else has become a boring bureaucratic mess.

[@ovidiulu]

@@TheNefastor I agree. R&D was in my mind also, figuring out a different way of doing the same thing is fun most of the times, at least for me. Sure the fun it's getting away at the extremes... Anyway, don't let this troublesome project put a shadow on your spirit for ten years and counting. Cheers

[@TheNefastor]

@@ovidiulu Oh don't worry, I left that particular project 10 years ago. I was just saying they haven't been able to make it work in the ten years since I quit because, well, that's what happens when you ask people to do the impossible :-D I've moved on to bigger and better things now, including a probe that will be launched to Mars soon. Like I said, I don't take shit from anyone, especially from employers.

[@WWeronko]

I don't even think SpaceX thought they'd win. This has to be a first positive Friday surprise in a long while. Go SpaceX.

[@jasonwalker9471]

Somewhere, deep in SpaceX's headquarters, a group of engineers are pulling an all-nighter desperately trying to figure out what the company needs to start doing on Monday to pull this off. The phrase, "ohshitohshitohshit" is being repeated over and over again while in a fetal position. More seriously, I do wonder if this came as a shock to people at SpaceX.

[@damstachizz]

@@jasonwalker9471 It absolutely, 100% no question came as a shock to SpaceX. They were competing against a big blob of every company that throws literal millions around at congress to get everything they ever wanted. The F-35 is the most expensive thing humanity has ever created despite being a single engine plane and yet lockheed martin are still right now getting contracts, if that doesn't tell you how many senators have their money lining their pockets nothing will. This is purely NASA getting fed up with their nonsense and being forced to use the SLS, so they decide to throw enough money at SpaceX that WHEN they're finally allowed to just throw the whole thing in the bin, they can immediately switch over to starship and save literal billions every year

[@Wordsmiths]

​@@jasonwalker9471 Not a complete shock. Someone sat down with Gwynne Shotwell and said, "Okay, we only have X in the budget. Even though you're the low bidder, we still won't have enough in our account to make these first-year milestone payments. Can you work with us here?" I'll bet THAT meeting was a shock! And whoever Shotwell quietly conferred with on the SpaceX team-THAT was a shock to them! But this isn't a school science contest. The winner is notified before it is announced. And in this case, it had to happen even sooner, as they had to make sure the "winner" would accept the prize even though they would not be paid as expected!

[@davidboyle1902]

Love your enthusiasm. Would also love your take on the engine complex for Lunar Starship, and whether it will possess any SL Raptors.

[@bilinasmini3480]

13:37 I know you want to see this part again ...! lost count of how many times I replayed this part ..

[@yetanotherstronk]

"How does Starship integrate with SLS?" ... *embarrassed silence*

[@xcforce9067]

... by replacing it.

[@pexpressairline659]

Radio silence

[@Sekir80]

@@xcforce9067 Yeah... Quite a possibilty. I guess SpaceX will be able to their own Moon landing without any NASA help.

[@Markle2k]

@@Sekir80 Don't get carried away with fanboyism. SpaceX is a partner with NASA, ESA, and JAXA. Without their expertise in operating humans in Space, SpaceX would have to reinvent that wheel.

[@Sekir80]

@@Markle2k And I like how they are partnering up, don't get me wrong. I won't deny that I love what SpaceX is trying to do, but it wasn't really fanboying it just my limited mindset. I was thinking on the technical/engineering part while stating SpaceX can do it alone, not the validation on human spaceflight needs which is equally important! I'll try to remember these things. :)

[@edd4816]

That's probably the most enthusiastic fly safe I've heard from Scott in a while, it's fun seeing him this excited :D

[@bilbo_gamers6417]

So cool seeing this video again with the news about starship HLS.

[@robertfrank16]

2 weeks later: SN15 nails landing without going kaboom. What have you done today?

[@officialspock]

Eat a bag of doritos

[@---jj9lf]

I pooped a large tower! I'm so glad of myself :)

[@idevalex]

Contemplate my life choices

[@Hiker58]

Thanks Scott. Most of the articles I've read are about the lack of Congressional funding. Your reporting on the technical shortcomings and contractual problems are top shelf!

[@saratogapilot6100]

Trying to get NG, Lockheed Martin and Draper labs to collaborate on a program would be a nightmare. They would all be fighting over workshare from the onset.

[@peterbondy]

And it would be a black hole for money. They wouldn’t stay anywhere near budget.

[@NwoDispatcher]

Machine mind vs god head

[@MrKentaroMotoPI]

The Saturn V was a collaboration between Boeing, North American, Douglas, Grumman, Northrop, and Draper Labs. That's why it never happened.

[@peterbondy]

@@MrKentaroMotoPI that was a long time ago with very different politics at play and a very different business culture. That was a very different USA to the one today.

[@MrKentaroMotoPI]

@@peterbondy Yes, that was back before the U.S. was a communist dictatorship and before NASA was best known for dead astronauts and climate lies.

[@improwertyk]

Scott, I love seeing you being that happy! :D

[@rickberger4081]

One consideration is that along with the lander, they'll get a capable first stage if they want it, or if SLS turns out badly or too costly. In that respect, it's a pretty smart hedge.

[@johntheux9238]

Damn, it's the first time people have good questions and there is nobody to answer them, what a shame!

[@krist6074]

I was just reading through some of the comments and this came to my mind: Starship is the big fat semi truck that'll move our equipment to the surface so we can build infrastructure. The other proposals is like trying to do the same thing, only with a Mini Cooper LOL

[@jesusmora9379]

a bicycle

[@mzaite]

Yea hey speaking of, How's Elon's Big Fat Semi Truck coming along?

[@TexanUSMC8089]

@@mzaite It's looking great .

[@jacksons1010]

@@mzaite It’s years overdue, not that there’s a pattern of Elon over promising and underdelivering. Surely this lunar lander will be on time and under budget. 😬

[@onebylandtwoifbysearunifby5475]

@@jacksons1010 Not to worry, It will be as successful as Hyper Loop.

[@louisesmalling]

Wow, so much to learn. Thanks to you and many others, I will be along for the ride.

[@randolphtorres4172]

THANKS4GIVING you are the Man Mr Manly

[@youtubevanced4900]

The traditional space companies thought this was usual run of the mill, massive delays and lots of extra money. SpaceX coming in with a real idea and real plan.

[@qozia1370]

Exactly

[@eliyasne9695]

But also, guns blazing.

[@chri-k]

@@eliyasne9695 and their test models are also blazing. But at least they can fly, while the other ones can’t.

[@RamblingRodeo]

Yup, that is it in a nutshell these old outdated areospace companies acting as if they are entitled to the money, that is always massive delays, more and more money unlike SpaceX they do what they say. I am glad to see this!

[@KP3droflxp]

@Scott Murphy Elon is literally the CEO of delays and false promises (just look at the LA loop)

[@fiveoneecho]

This surprised me a lot at first, but then with the economics, it's like "Oh.. No shit." Edit: Really hoping SpaceX doesn't lose this because they seem like the safest option in terms of things not getting pushed out 30 years by reshuffling of budgets every election cycle. Not saying the lander wouldn't get pushed out 10 by delays, but they are also the furthest into their test campaign, so I mean...

[@RaimarLunardi]

SpaceX winning is bad, they have nothing real to show... those "engine weights" they were exploding on landing recently are so far from a moon landing as a V2 was far away from the Saturn V

[@tropicbliss1198]

@@RaimarLunardi What about the others. Do they have anything to show? If you're saying that SpaceX is bad because they have nothing to show the others are much worse. They don't even have anything remotely resembling this that's working, not even an engine.

[@LazyLifeIFreak]

@@RaimarLunardi SpaceX has progress to show, the others had absolutely NOTHING to show.

[@fiveoneecho]

@@RaimarLunardi I know you want to be noticed for being woke, but literally no one else is trying to solve this rapidly reusable,, large rocket problem. Rocket Lab is the only other company coming close, and they just have a totally different market. Please understand that the Soviet Union gave up on (that's huge when it comes to rocket engines) full-flow staged combustion, and SpaceX has gotten a few successful demonstration flights in powered by that cycle.

[@akaikiseki9346]

@@RaimarLunardi YOOOOOOO WHAT ?! This HAS to be trolling.

[@bobfeyereisen5521]

I love your videos Scott. Thank you

[@fabiolima9570]

I think that the SpaceX’ ability to delivery its projects on time was one of the main points considered by NASA.

[@Baerchenization]

Are you a crazy person? SpaceX was 6 years late to even go to orbit. SpaceX wanted to land on Mars this year for the second time, and then every launch window following that.... how about a reality check?

[@alexkorman1163]

Ummm, spaceX, and anything made by Elon Musk really, are very famous for missing their launch dates.

[@joonalehtola]

@@Baerchenization spacex was the best option for sure.

[@Baerchenization]

@@joonalehtola I am not sure how that relates to the discussion. He said they are known for being on time and they are simply not. Are they really the best option? No working booster segment, no working Starship, not even a blue print of it and no blueprint of a possible Moon-faring Starship, which will have to be a different one all together according to their own plans. No refuelling mechanism demonstrated (only recently contracted to be developed in the future), not been to orbit and use of prone to failure turbo-pump engine design... so lets see just how good that will all turn out to be. And they will need a fuck tonne of launches, Jesus Christ. Btw, I like how the concept art around the internet suggests that fuel for Starship will be produced on the Moon... you know, carbo-hydrates on the Moon :) We have raised a lost generation... Just last week, we had another Musk promise kinda arrive in the news - the Tesla solar roof tiles. They are 15 years late and after being promised as cheaper than regular tiles (everything Musk promises is always cheaper), they are now twice as expensive ;) Just like the cheapest Tesla was almost twice as expensive if you actually wanted one... so I know this Moon thing is gonna be good... have you heard of failed projects, where the gov has sunk a fuck tonne of tax dollars, only to pull out at some point? I think we are just looking at another one.

[@fabiolima9570]

@@Baerchenization ok, maybe I shouldn't have written "on time", but at least they deliver their projects. If Nasa had relied on Boeing, Lockheed, Blue Origin, to send austronauts to the ISS, US would still be sending them through Russia and this is a fact.