Thank you so much!

The whole issue will come down to funding. If he doesn't exist, then everything else won't happen...

lets hope so and i think Elon should cut ties with NASA and go it alone.

And yet, no matter how perfect a tool is in a person’s hands, the benefits of its use are directly related to what is in a person’s head, to the level of his maturity as a strategist.

Thank you for your reminder! I will note that!

I watch their videos to read the comments. Some are just complaints, but some are much more enlightening and informative than the videos.

@@tmg7476 that’s a great point! I will start reading the comments more 😊🚀

Space X Starship could dock with Dragon earlier. Dragon is fully qualified to carry the crew and return crew from orbit. It would be like a mission to the ISS. All space X needs to do is send the upper half of Starship (command and cargo section) to NASA environmental vacuum chamber to be certified. It can be then welded to the lower fuel tanks and engine sections. After that Dragon can Taxi the crew back and forth to Starship in orbit. This proves everything except orbital refueling. Dragon in that case would arrive after successful refueling, eliminating all flight hazards. This makes everything ready for the Orion docking test.

@@djohannsson8268 I strongly doubt that NASA's vacuum chamber has enough sizes to test SpaceX living section.

The Space Power Facility at NASA Glenn Research Center's Plum Brook Station in Sandusky, Ohio, houses the world's largest vacuum chamber. It measures 100 feet in diameter and is a towering 122 feet tall.

NASA's chronic dependence on political and economic conditions, trends, and the wishes of big bosses is making itself felt...(

Maybe why Starship V3 design exists so soon, it has twice the payload capacity of V2. Delivering more fuel and Starlinks to orbit, or GEO when desired without refueling. Starship V2 is mainly an improved version of the test prototype V1.

The imagination draws a bunch of possibilities. And reality turns this pile into dust...

Your comments are amazing! Starship isn't exactly suited to being a lander, but it will have to do this! Really looking forward to when SpaceX and Elon Musk accomplish the mission!

Your ideas are very reasonable. It’s a pity that people making decisions are far from them due to formalism and populism...

@@sp66-know-try-think I get heard.... not sure what the exact path is, but have been planting concepts long term on internet and watching them spread and get adopted. Was me who planted parts count, the new hot staging ring design is mine, did writs on it here on Alpha tech. Elon's joke about Jeff not being able to get it up was mine... Many other such things. Waiting for the next test flight to see if my suggested improved flight profile gets tried. And I've messed with NASA's ideas regularly... In fact, thats how it started, decades ago when NASA offered an X prize for a strip climber for Space Elevator, I published a writ online that blew up their concept and suggested a tubular design, and a NASA engineer edited my synopsis off Wiki and called it absurd... 3 years later NASA put up a tubular concept Space Elevator video on you tube.. Theirs sucked design wise, due to a linear gasketing issue. And I got that engineers email and reminded him he had booted my concept 3 years earlier. He apoligized. But I realized the concept planting dynamics. That if you planted concepts people would call you crazy snd stupid, then think, and then steal the concept and take credit. I've been very influential online since... Did political comentary, and planted things you have heard of because it got used. And have affected Starship more than anybody else not on the payroll.... I do writs on other Space sites too... Make suggestions of ways to do things better... What it is, is most people arent very imaginative and practical at the same time. They get wall hangers to learn to crunch numbers to be "Scientific" but that retards creative thinking. And most have little real world experience... Practical applications are a weak point. So they anger when a Peasant suggests, but also they are trapped by necessity of results, and most dont have good long term memory and easily forget the concept source and adopt the idea as their own. I've given up on getting credited, and just developed it into an art. I do writs, and enjoy helping better things... There's actually a saying about it in the Tao: "Accept being unimportant." Thats a way to discover how to be powerful. I have been affecting Space stuff for many years now. Alot of times they hate me.... Many times banned for it. But theres alot of channels and forums and I just hop to the next one and continue. So dont worry, I get results without portfolio! By feeding concepts into the garbage in, and watching the garbage out for the results... 🤣

Technically correct. Strategically, NASA needs to develop all the necessary orbital infrastructure for energy, transport, and life support for people in space (the ISS is just a step on a long path). And at the next stage, plan Lunar missions. And the current bustle does not bode well for anything good.

Thank you so much! Have a good day!

…Where would the taker station get the fuel, to refuel the starship, from.

The purpose for the tanker is to steadily keep it full with automated launches. Then when they are ready to go the starship brings the crew to the station and refuel then head on. No need to lauch a ship into space then launch another with people in it to transfer to the vessel they are going to then take. Just stay in the starship. If I explained that clearly.

Do you remember the problem of cryogenic fuel leaking in space over time? Has it already been decided or is it just in the distant future?

@@sp66-know-try-think it’s call Boil off. It not leaking, its being purposely released to relieve pressure or the tank may rupture.

@@gregdeen1469How many automated launches?

More precisely, politicians do not know what to want from NASA. Every four years, new adjustments to plans and financing...

Yep... 3 hundred successful launching and landing of Falcon 9 in a row absolutely prove the correctness of your appreciation.

Right. SLS is on time and under budget. Same for Mobile Launcher 2 which it requires. How many trips has Starliner made to the ISS? And how did Orion's heat shield hold up on their bouncing reentry? Right. Nasa has a great track record and all the over promises are SpaceX only.

@@vyacheslavromantovsky1238 Falcon ) has nothing to do with Artemis. My discussion is pertinent to Artemis, for which, with two years overdue, SpaceX has demonstrated none of the capabilities it promised.

@@tmg7476 SLS is indeed over time and over budget, but performed flawlessly. Starliner had its own issues and can be perfectly criticized. On the other hand also crewed Dragon was over time costing taxpayers over a billion in Russian transport costs. The heatshield on Orion did perform differently than expected, but still allowed the capsule to return safely to earth with no internal overheating: compare that with SpaceX braking apart before even shedding speed. Nowhere did I claim that ONLY SpaceX has issues with timing and budget, yet at the moment it is the only so late and so under preforming to cast the whole program into doubt.

In my opinion, this comment is just not true.