POWER!

16.7 million lbs thrust -> 40 million HP -> 64 747's -> 773 Tesla Roadsters

How a camera survives this, I have no idea. pic.twitter.com/WLqDqGSChB

— Nic Cruz Patane (@niccruzpatane) October 16, 2025

Not to mention they get audio! I have no idea how that happens. There are some really smart people in the world.

SPACEX NEWS: Remember the California Coastal Commission who objected to SpaceX increasing launches at Vandenberg Space Fore Base. You know, the group who literally said they were doing it because Elon supported Trump and they did not like his posts on X. Then Gov Newsom said they… pic.twitter.com/I96FFTQlpy

— S.E. Robinson, Jr. (@SERobinsonJr) October 17, 2025

Good to see SLC-6 getting used again after the last delta heavy went up a few years ago. Wonder if they'll re use the infrastructure already there. I think the original plan was to tear down all the old ULA stuff to return it back to the USSF but not sure if that ever happened.

Now if they could only figure out how to bring the golf course back.

hph6203 said:

---

Musk tried to operate DOGE, head of personnel Sergio Gor didn't like Musk's meddling, Musk lashed out at Gor, Gor pulled support of Isaacman as retaliation (citing donations to Democratic candidates despite donating to Trump's campaign), Gor didn't get permanent security clearance (June, unclear his country of origin, Malta says not from Malta, says he's from Uzbekistan when still Soviet), Gor assigned as India Ambassador last month, Scavino replaces Gor within the last week, opening for Isaacman nomination returns.

I'm sure there's politics with relationship to Alabama/Huntsville, but it was reportedly Gor and his feud with Musk that caused Isaacman's nomination to be pulled. Isaacman is Musk's preferred appointee. Isaacman being pulled was the cause of the Trump/Musk rift.

---

Fingers crossed. Even if this works out, so much time has been wasted.

Sean Duffy looking to replace Space X's HLS for Artemis 3, citing development delays.

https://spacenews.com/duffy-says-nasa-will-open-artemis-3-lander-contract-to-competition/?fbclid=IwdGRjcANkU0hleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHuqf3nFQnMmKFuIWT1aMeq15lS94EDNCkzq75Hwo-IsqNHgd5v6OxTiLFTq1_aem_qDGhviu4JZ2M2NtXulWtUQ

This should be dominating this thread:

Duffy says NASA will open Artemis 3 lander contract to competition https://t.co/9FJz3xxNgJ pic.twitter.com/6zyKjFJXK4

— SpaceNews (@SpaceNews_Inc) October 20, 2025

I've been on the phone all day. Here's what I think is going on with Duffy's announcement of more competition in the lunar lander program.https://t.co/sxYktBB4mF

— Eric Berger (@SciGuySpace) October 20, 2025

Quote:

---

When Duffy says "companies like Blue" may get involved, he is not referring to the existing contract, in which Blue Origin will not deliver a ready-to-go lunar lander until the 2030s. Rather he is almost certainly referring to a plan developed by Blue Origin that uses multiple Mk 1 landers, a smaller vehicle originally designed for cargo only. Ars reported on this new lunar architecture three weeks ago, which company engineers have been quietly developing. This plan would not require in-space refueling, and the Mk 1 vehicle is nearing its debut flight early next year.

---

will25u said:

---

POWER!

16.7 million lbs thrust -> 40 million HP -> 64 747's -> 773 Tesla Roadsters

How a camera survives this, I have no idea. pic.twitter.com/WLqDqGSChB

— Nic Cruz Patane (@niccruzpatane) October 16, 2025

---

Behind a protective enclosure

More cost plus contracts 10x the size of the existing SpaceX and Blue Origin contracts? Stop feeding the stupid machine!

If NASA selects Blue Origin's lander, by the time it lands SpaceX will, as Elon says, do the entire mission themselves and at a far bigger scale than NASA will be doing with their tiny Blue lander.

It won't be a NASA mission, it will be a private space mission that will make NASA's effort look like a joke in comparison.

Decay said:

---

More cost plus contracts 10x the size of the existing SpaceX and Blue Origin contracts? Stop feeding the stupid machine!

---

You haven't seen anything yet. Wait until NASA wants access to the lunar base SpaceX builds on the lunar south pole that can only be practically built by Starship and has to pay the entry fee.

"SpaceX had the contract for Artemis 3," Duffy said on CNBC. "The problem is they're behind. They push their timelines out, and we're in a race against China. The president and I want to get to the moon in this president's term."

"SpaceX Chief Executive Elon Musk appeared unconcerned about potential competition. "They won't," he said in a social media post responding to a comment that it was "silly" to think another company would have a lander ready before Starship. "SpaceX is moving like lightning compared to the rest of the space industry."

"Moreover, Starship will end up doing the whole moon mission. Mark my words," he added."

I wouldn't bet against Musk and SpaceX. He's going to make NASA look pretty foolish when one of his crews waves back at them from the moon while they wait for Artemis.

TexAgs91 said:

---

If NASA selects Blue Origin's lander, by the time it lands SpaceX will, as Elon says, do the entire mission themselves and at a far bigger scale than NASA will be doing with their tiny Blue lander.

It won't be a NASA mission, it will be a private space mission that will make NASA's effort look like a joke in comparison.

---

It's not the Blue Lander, it's a man rated version of the mk1 cargo lander going to an equatorial landing site.

will25u said:

---

POWER!

16.7 million lbs thrust -> 40 million HP -> 64 747's -> 773 Tesla Roadsters

How a camera survives this, I have no idea. pic.twitter.com/WLqDqGSChB

— Nic Cruz Patane (@niccruzpatane) October 16, 2025

---

That's my district! Winning the Space Race from TX-34! Boom!...wait, no boom.

I just meant Blue Origin's lander. The one they intended to use as a manned lander is Blue Moon (Mk 2). And yes, Duffy is talking about using the Blue Moon Mark 1.\

ETA: By adding a crew module to the Mk 1, and additional power & life support components and modifying it so it can launch back into orbit, isn't that basically the same thing as a Mk 2?

If you have never been to a launch, I highly encourage it. And bring your family! You get to fish and watch history.

POV: @SpaceX launch from the South Padre Island Jetties. A phone camera doesn’t do it justice, but believe you/me you could FEEL all 33 Raptor engines. Here is to another successful test flight from @StarbaseTX and I can’t wait for Starship V3! @elonmusk pic.twitter.com/Jg3cRjqbr7

— Gregory Scott Kunkle Jr. (@GregoryKunkleJr) October 16, 2025

Don't tell Elon what he can't do because he'll turn around and do it just to prove you wrong.

What Sean Duffy does when he stops being polite, and starts being real.

According to a reality tv co-star, Trump Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy’s nickname is “ass rocket.” pic.twitter.com/kiRzLMtleg

— PatriotTakes 🇺🇸 (@patriottakes) February 3, 2025

Does anyone know if there is a public accessible gift/merch shop Starbase, Tx? I'm heading down there Thursday and would like to grab a shirt and hat if possible. Or is it online orders only?

I didn't see any such thing when I was there last week for the launch.

As is pointed out below, the SpaceX Falcon rocket will do more launches and carry more payload to orbit this year than the Space Shuttle did in its entire history https://t.co/a0GzXBMRcL

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) October 24, 2025

I see some orbital refueling ports...

https://t.co/ymnKQ8MELw

— Don Lueders (@DonLueders) October 29, 2025

This page is not supported.
Please visit the author's profile on the latest version of X to view this content.

Click on the x post and then the article in the x post

Pretty damning if true. Just the tip:

Quote:

---

At NASA where I worked as an electronic records management consultant for over five years, no one at the agency has complied with any Federal records management laws or regulations for nearly 20 years. This fact doesn't just mean NASA's responses to FOIA requests are inaccurate. It means the agency can alter, hide, or destroy any incriminating record relevant to a FOIA request that they don't want the American public to see.

---

Is there an agency out there that has accomplished less productive work than NASA with the enormous budget they have been given over the least 20-25 years? Most of the launches in the last decade plus have been by private companies and every contract NASA oversees seems to be way behind schedule and way over the initial budget. For the number of people actually employed directly by the agency and the number of facilities they have, they do surprisingly little actual work for themselves.

HLS updates released today.

https://www.spacex.com/updates#moon-and-beyond

Quote:

---

The next major flight milestones tied specifically to HLS will be a long-duration flight test and the in-space propellant transfer flight test. The exact timing will be driven by how upcoming flight tests debuting the new Starship V3 architecture progress, but both of these tests are targeted to take place in 2026. On-orbit refilling enables Starship to complete the Artemis lunar mission architecture and carry up to 100 tons directly to the lunar surface, providing the capability to carry rovers, habitats, and other payloads needed to establish a permanent, and sustainable, presence on the Moon.

It will start with a Starship launched from Starbase to spend an extended time on orbit, gathering data on vehicle propulsion and thermal behavior on an extended duration mission, including long duration propellant storage and boil-off characterization. A second Starship will then launch to rendezvous with the first to demonstrate ship-to-ship propellant transfer in Earth orbit.

---

If they complete an orbital refueling in 2026, surely that ship isn't just going to vent the fuel. Has to go somewhere, right?

There's a Tesla Roadster out there somewhere.

txags92 said:

---

Is there an agency out there that has accomplished less productive work than NASA with the enormous budget they have been given over the least 20-25 years? Most of the launches in the last decade plus have been by private companies and every contract NASA oversees seems to be way behind schedule and way over the initial budget. For the number of people actually employed directly by the agency and the number of facilities they have, they do surprisingly little actual work for themselves.

---

since 2000 NASA has assembled a space station larger than a football field, has had people living continuously in space for over 25 years, sent 11 spacecraft to mars, 6 missions to other planets, 8 major telescopes. But I guess those don't count.

NASA (and by extension JPL) shine on unmanned missions.

But NASA and manned missions just aren't working.

Mathguy64 said:

---

NASA (and by extension JPL) shine on unmanned missions.

But NASA and manned missions just aren't working.

---

Why is the space station so ignored? It's mankind's single most complex engineering achievement. We've conducted over 200 EVAs in the past 25 years.