And Bryan Preston has four questions.
[Update a while later]
The China challenge.
An interesting article on the latest advances in integrating all of the sensory apparatus. I’m assuming that, like most technology of this nature, it will be extensively and intensively porn driven.
…were probably already on the moon. I had a discussion about this on Twitter yesterday. I think people are making too big a deal over it.
The less racist it becomes, the more Republican it becomes.
Surprising no one familiar with the actual history. The Democrats have always been the party of racism, and likely always will be. It’s a defining feature.
They’re filing a lawsuit against the USAF over launch procurement.
I don’t understand why the Air Force wouldn’t want more than two launch providers.
I have some thoughts on Twitter, based on some of the comments here.
First, since people are saying that Blue Origin should demonstrate the ability to develop an orbital rocket, it’s fair to say that so should ULA. They’re flying vehicles developed by other companies over two decades ago.
Arguably, only two teams with recent orbital launcher development experience are SpaceX and NGIS (by acquiring Orbital ATK). Vulcan and New Glenn both currently remain paper rockets. At this point in time, SpaceX has the most experienced launch-development team on the planet.
And while NGIS does have the Antares experience, that won’t necessarily apply to their new vehicle. Even if it was a good idea, no one has successfully developed an orbital launcher based on a large segmented solid rocket. We know that Ares I had teething issues. And of course, this all ignores the reusability factor.
I assume that ULA still wants to recover engines, but that won’t make them competitive with Falcon series, let alone a successful Starship program. At least Blue plans booster reuse.
And ULA will remain hobbled by its parents’ unwillingness to allow it to spend sufficient resources on Vulcan development (and forget ACES). So the trajectory is that, if only two providers, Blue Origin and SpaceX are the way for the USAF to bet.
Also, both Blue Origin and SpaceX will have large commercial markets. Because it probably won’t be cost competitive, Vulcan probably won’t. But there are political reasons for the blue suits (if they remain in charge of launch procurement) to want to keep ULA alive.
If I were the head of Pentagon procurement, I’d go talk to the
FECFTC about forcing a divestiture of ULA from its parents, not just on legitimate charges of child abuse, but because of the huge changes that have occurred in the launch market since 2006. But USAF seems to be stuck in the past, when it comes to procuring launches.
A nice history of the RD-180 and how it’s about to be superceded by both BE-4 and Raptor. The days of Russian dominance in rocket propulsion have come to an end.
The FBI is investigating Epstein’s island.
…reviews her own show.
Who better to judge?
Ready to fly by 2022?
I’d normally say “Faster, please,” but unless Elon really beats his own stated schedule, I’d say that’s fast enough. I just hope it’s true.
I haven’t read it, but Mike Combs has written a short story about killing JFK.
Forbes: Do not question the orthodoxy.
Speaking of which, hurricane forecasters are admitting they’re reaching the limits of being able to predict tracks, because (surprise!) hurricanes are complex non-linear chaotic systems.